HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 09/22/2003AGENDA
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
September 22, 2003
Monday, 7:30 p.m.
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
3. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS:
a. I4Q5 RTID (Regional Transportation Investment District) Briefing
b. Distinguished Budget Presentation Award
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Real Estate Sign Code Amendments
5. APPEAL: Planning & Development Committee Report re: Urban Crafts Mixed Use Project
INABILITY OF THE CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE TESTIMONY ON APPEALS DURING THE CITY
COUNCIL MEETING
State law requires that the City establish a process to handle appeals from application of environmental and
developmental rules and regulations. The Renton City Council, feeling it was best for the elected
representatives to handle the appeals rather than require citizens to go to court, has retained appellate
jurisdiction to itself.
The courts have held that the City Council, while sitting as an appellate body, is acting as a quasi-judicial
body and must obey rules of procedure of a court more than that of a political body.
By City Code, and by State law, the City Council may not consider new evidence in this appeal. The parties
to the appeal have had an opportunity to address their arguments to the Planning & Development
Committee of the City Council at a meeting previously held. Because of the court requirements prohibiting
the City Council from considering new evidence, and because all parties have had an opportunity to address
their concerns to the Planning & Development Committee, the City Council may not consider oral or written
testimony at the City Council meeting. The Council understands that this is frustrating to citizens and is
outside the normal process of open discourse provided to citizenry during the audience comment portion of
the City Council meeting. However, this burden of not allowing the Council to be addressed concerning
pending appeals is outweighed by the quick, easy, inexpensive and local appeal process provided by the
Renton City Council.
6. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
7. AUDIENCE COMMENT (Speakers must sign up prior to the Council meeting. Each speaker is
allowed five minutes. The comment period will be limited to one-half hour. The second audience
comment period later on in the agenda is unlimited in duration.)
When you are recognized by the Presiding Officer, please walk to the podium and state your name
and address for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME.
8. CONSENT AGENDA
The following items are distributed to Councilmembers in advance for study and review, and the
recommended actions will be accepted in a single motion. Any item may be removed for further
discussion if requested by a Councilmember.
(CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE)
r
a. Approval of Committee of the Whole meeting minutes of September 15, 2003. Council concur.
b. Approval of Council meeting minutes of September 15, 2003. Council concur.
c. City Clerk reports bid opening on 9/11/2003 for CAG-03-112, Maplewood Water Treatment
Facility and Golf Course Improvements; six bids; engineer's estimate $10,671,956; and submits
staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc., in
the amount of $10,644,448. Council concur.
d. Development Services Division recommends acceptance of dedication of right-of-way at NW 3rd
Ct. to fulfill a requirement of the Reservoir Short Plat (SHP-0 I - 169). Council concur.
e. Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an agreement with the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) to complete the Springbrook Creek floodplain map update.
Council concur. (See 11. for resolution.)
9. CORRESPONDENCE
10. OLD BUSINESS
Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics
marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by
the chairman if further review is necessary.
a. Finance Committee: Fire Station #12 (901 Harrington Ave. NE) Property Surplus; Refunding of
Water/Sewer Debt*; Vouchers
b. Transportation Committee: Berger/Abam Contract for King County Portion of Duvall Ave. NE
Widening Project; Lake Washington Blvd. Slip Plane Project Fund Reallocation; NE 3rd/4th
Street Corridor Study Contract
11. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS
Resolution:
Springbrook Creek floodplain map update agreement with FEMA (see 8.e.)
Ordinances for second and final reading:
a. Highlands redevelopment area residential -oriented amendments (1st reading 9/15/2003)
b. 2003 Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds issuance (1st reading 9/15/2003; see 10.a.)
12. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded
information.)
13. AUDIENCE COMMENT
vi•1:Nul►1
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
AGENDA
(Preceding Council Meeting)
Council Chambers
5:30 p.m.
Boeing Environmental Impact Statement Land Use & Zoning
• Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk •
CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST
TUES. & THURS. AT 11:00 AM & 9:00 PM, WED. & FRI. AT 9:00 AM & 7:00 PM AND SAT. & SUN. AT 1:00 PM & 9:00 PM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
September 22, 2003
Council Chambers
Monday, 7:30 p.m.
MINUTES Renton City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Jesse Tanner led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the
meeting of the Renton City Council to order.
ROLL CALL OF
KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Council President; TERRI BRIERE; KING
COUNCILMEMBERS
PARKER; DON PERSSON; RANDY CORMAN; TONI NELSON; DAN
CLAWSON.
CITY STAFF IN
JESSE TANNER, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE
ATTENDANCE
WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public
Works Administrator; JASON JORDAN, Senior Planner; JENNIFER
HENNING, Principal Planner; PAUL BAKER, Code Compliance Officer,
SANDRA MEYER, Transportation Systems Director; NICK AFZALI,
Transportation Planning & Programming Supervisor; ALEX PIETSCH,
Economic Development Administrator; SHAWNA MULHALL, Development
Manager; LESLIE BETLACH, Parks Director; TERRENCE FLATLEY, Parks
Manager; KELLY BEYMER, Golf Course Manager; KAREN BERGSVIK,
Human Services Manager; DEREK TODD, Assistant to the CAO; ACTING
COMMANDER TIMOTHY TROXEL, Police Department.
SPECIAL
Craig Stone, I-405 Project Director for the Washington State Department of
PRESENTATIONS
Transportation, provided an update on the three -county Regional
WSDOT: I-405 Corridor,
Transportation Improvement District (RTID), focusing on the I-405 program.
Regional Transportation
Mr. Stone reviewed the I-405 business goals: 1) deliver the "nickel package"
Investment District
(an approved statewide transportation funding plan funded by the five cent gas
tax) on time and within budget; and 2) build a ten-year implementation plan to
tie in with the regional effort. He stated that funds in the amount of $485
million have been slated for the three I-405 nickel projects in Renton, Bellevue,
and Kirkland, which are currently being designed. In the Renton area, one lane
will be added northbound between West Valley Hwy. and the SR-167
interchange, and one lane will be added southbound between Maple Valley
Hwy. and the SR-167 interchange.
Mr. Stone reported on the progress of the I-405 nickel projects, which include
continuing the design development and moving forward with the environmental
assessments. Describing the regional vision for the I-405 corridor, he detailed
the implementation principals directing the vision such as addressing the worst
first; building logical segments; minimizing risk, delays, and construction
impacts; and achieving modal balance.
Continuing, Mr. Stone stated that of the funding packages being developed for
the region, the "C" package is being recommended since it provides the
functionality that is essential for the first investments over the next ten years.
He detailed the traffic improvements within the recommended package,
reviewed the package costs and funding levels, and explained how the funding
will be matched to the transportation projects list. In regards to the Renton
area, Mr. Stone described the potential traffic improvements in North Renton
(SR-169 to Coal Creek) and in South Renton (I-5 to SR-169), and discussed the
different alternates for the SR-167 interchange.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 338
In response to Councilman Parker's inquiry regarding King County Executive
Ron Sim's transportation proposal, Mr. Stone confirmed that the proposal
includes transit components, which would entail a legislative change for
authorization. He stated that King County is working towards developing a
well-balanced transportation package.
Responding to Councilman Clawson's inquiry regarding the SR-167
interchange and the proposal for additional transit lanes (Alternate B), Mr.
Stone explained that along the I-405 corridor, the current transit lanes are
carrying a large number of vehicles, and without freeway -to -freeway access,
those vehicles must travel through the SR-167 interchange. The additional
transit lanes would alleviate that, resulting in a continuous system from Auburn
to Bothell.
Councilman Corman commented that Alternate A was rejected since a
bottleneck will be created if additional lanes are added to 1-405 while only
having one off -ramp. He questioned the feasibility of the transit tie alternate,
saying that the single -occupancy vehicle speed will decrease through the SR-
167 interchange. Pointing out that a flyover ramp may be needed to alleviate
that problem, Mr. Corman stated that more work needs to be done on the
project design.
Mr. Stone reiterated that the phasing options of the SR-167 interchange need to
be coupled with the phasing options of the I-405 corridor investment levels.
PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in
Development Services: Real accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Tanner opened the public hearing
Estate Sign Code Amendments to consider the proposed real estate sign code amendments, including garage
sale sign code amendments.
Senior Planner Jason Jordan stated that the Real Estate Signs Design Review
Team was formed to review the existing real estate sign code in a response to
issues that have been presented to Council from home and business owners
throughout the City. He reviewed the different types of real estate signs, and
summarized the issues as follows: real estate sign requirements are dated and
confusing; real estate and garage sign regulations are scattered throughout the
entire sign regulations; some sections of the real estate sign code are
unenforceable; and garage sale sign code requirements do not specify location
and duration.
Continuing, Mr. Jordan stated that the review team recommends that the real
estate and garage sale sign regulations be amended to clarify what and where
the signs are allowed, to organize the real estate sign code section, to simplify
the sign code regulations for the public and City staff, and to create enforceable
sign code regulations. He concluded by relaying examples of the proposed
amendments, which include modifying the size and location of off -premise real
estate signs, clarifying which real estate signs are prohibited, and adding real
estate sign definitions.
Council President Keolker-Wheeler suggested that the garage sale sign
regulations be made distinct from the real estate sign code regulations, and
pointed out that garage sale sign enforcement is difficult. Code Compliance
Officer Paul Baker noted that the real estate signs and garage sale signs are
each listed within their own category under the temporary sign code.
Public comment was invited.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 339
Sam Pace, realtor and Seattle -King County Association of Realtors Housing
Specialist, 12015 115th Ave. NE, #195, Kirkland, 98034, noted that the
association of realtors was not part of the sign design review team, and he
indicated three areas of concern regarding the proposed real estate sign code
amendments. First, Mr. Pace detailed the importance of real estate signs,
noting that the elimination of signs would take away the real estate agent's and
property owner's most effective tool. Second, he indicated that the signs help
achieve the objectives of the 1988 Federal Fair Housing amendments to the
Civil Rights Act of 1968. Third, Mr. Pace noted his concerns regarding some
of the proposed amendments such as the allowed text for open house signs, and
posting time allowed for on -premise real estate signs for plats.
Continuing, Mr. Pace suggested including additional restrictions for real estate
open house signs, which state that signs must not block driveways or curb cuts;
must not be placed on trees, foliage, utility poles, or on regulatory, directional,
or informational signs; and must not impede vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, or
wheelchair traffic.
Responding to Councilman Clawson's inquiry regarding posting signs in a
maintained public right-of-way, Mr. Pace stated that it is sometimes difficult to
get permission to post the signs from the abutting property owner or
representative. Acknowledging that right-of-way restriction is a complex issue,
he suggested focusing instead on prohibiting the conduct that the City does not
want.
Discussion followed regarding right-of-way sign postings, potential damage to
the right-of-way, the types of signs that should be allowed in the right-of-way
(A -frame or staked signs), and who is held accountable if the right-of-way is
damaged as a result of a sign posting.
Councilmembers expressed their appreciation for Mr. Pace's suggestions, and
Mr. Pace stated his willingness to help the City with this matter.
There being no further public comment, it was MOVED BY PARKER,
SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.
CARRIED.
APPEAL
Planning and Development Committee Chair Briere presented a report
Planning & Development
regarding the appeal of the Urban Crafts Mixed Use Site Plan and requested
Committee
modifications (SA-03-035). The Committee convened to consider the appeal of
Appeal: Urban Crafts Mixed
the decision of the Hearing Examiner dated July 3, 2003. The subject property
Use, BDJS Associates, SA-03-
is located at 400 Olympia Ave. NE, Renton, Washington. The applicant, H.
035
Lee Johnson of BDJS Associates, sought approval for the construction of a
27,528 square foot retail, office, and creative workspace building. The
applicant also requested modifications of the required setbacks along both
Olympia Ave. NE and NE 4th St.
The Hearing Examiner did not approve the site plan and requested
modifications, stating that the building was too large for the site and
inconsistent with the Center Suburban (CS) zoning in which it is located. Both
the applicant and City staff requested the Hearing Examiner reconsider his
decision. The request was prompted by City staffs belief that they had
incorrectly designated the front and side yards of the building, thus applying the
incorrect setbacks. The motion for reconsideration was denied and an appeal to
the City Council followed.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 340
FINDINGS OF FACT
1) The Committee found that the proper orientation of the proposed building
places the front yard along the Olympia Ave. NE frontage, making the
required setback a minimum of ten feet.
2) The Committee found that the building as proposed would provide only a
five-foot setback, thus requiring a modification.
3) The Committee found the requested front yard setback to be minor in
nature.
4) The Committee found that the proper orientation of the proposed building
places the side yard along the NE 4th St. frontage, making the required
setback a minimum of ten feet, with no maximum required.
5) The Committee found the building as proposed provides a sixty -foot
setback, thus no modification is required.
6) The Committee found the project as proposed consistent with the CS
zoning goals.
7) The Committee found the proposed building's lot coverage of
approximately 25% makes it of appropriate size and proportion for the
subject lot.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1) Based on an incorrect orientation of the proposed building, placing the
front yard along NE 4th St., the Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact #16
stated a maximum setback of 15 feet is required. This is a substantial error
of fact.
2) Based on the error of fact found in Finding of Fact #16, the Hearing
Examiner erroneously concluded that the proposed building did not meet
the required front yard setbacks. This was a substantial error of law.
3) The Hearing Examiner's determination, in both the initial hearing and the
motion for reconsideration, that the proposed building was too large for the
subject site, was a substantial error of fact.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The Committee recommended that the City Council approve the requested front
yard setback modification along Olympia Ave. NE. The Committee further
recommended the City Council approve the site plan with the conditions
proposed on page ten of the Hearing Examiner's decision dated July 3, 2003.
MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
ADMINISTRATIVE Derek Todd, Assistant to the Chief Administrative Officer, reviewed a written
REPORT administrative report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and
work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2003 and beyond. Items
noted included:
Dogs and their owners will have their own designated off -leash area in
South King County when the new Grandview Park is dedicated and opened
on October 4 at 10:00 a.m. The new off -leash area is located in the City of
SeaTac at S. 228th St. and Military Rd. S.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 341
The City of Renton Neighborhood Grant Program has launched its second
round of grant funding, and $46,700 remains for 2003 projects. Grant
applications are due by 5:00 p.m. on October 3, 2003.
Board/Commission: Human Human Services Manager Karen Bergsvik introduced Cristen Baca, the newest
Services Advisory Committee member of the Human Services Advisory Committee. Ms. Baca stated that she
Member Introduction, Cristen is looking forward to serving the community.
Baca
AUDIENCE COMMENT
Inez Petersen, 3306 Lake Washington Blvd. N., Apt. 3, Renton, 98056,
Citizen Comment: Petersen -
expressed her concern regarding the treatment and apparent eviction of Carlos
Aguilar Eviction from 311
Aguilar from the Awareness of Life Church property located at 311 Smithers
Smithers Ave S Property
Ave. S. Noting her belief that State law overrides City Code, Ms. Petersen
urged the City to treat Mr. Aguilar legally and fairly.
Citizen Comment: Aguilar -
Chavez "Carlos" Aguilar, 311 Smithers Ave. S., Renton, 98055, presented the
Aguilar Eviction from 311
City with his notice to vacate property located at 311 Smithers Ave. S. Mr.
Smithers Ave S Property
Aguilar stated that proper notices to vacate have not been served to him
according to the State Landlord -Tenant Act, and he stressed that the eviction
process requires proper notification and the use of the proper forms.
Mayor Tanner stated that the City is not going to get involved with landlord -
tenant actions, which are a civil matter. The City's interest in the matter only
pertains to the trailer located on the property, which is in violation of City
Code.
City Attorney Larry Warren explained that according to City Code, the
occupancy of the structure on the subject property is in violation of the
property's zoning, and will be enforced as a violation of the zoning code. The
property owner will be notified that there is an illegal structure being occupied
on the premises, and if that situation is not remedied, a citation will be issued.
Additionally, the tenant of the illegal structure will also be noticed and if the
violation continues, the tenant will be issued a citation.
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator confirmed that a letter has been
sent to Mr. Aguilar informing him of the zoning code violation, and the City
intends to provide a notice of violation for compliance by October 1.
CONSENT AGENDA
Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the
listing. At the request of Councilman Persson, item 8.c. was removed for
separate consideration.
Committee of the Whole
Approval of Committee of the Whole meeting minutes of September 15, 2003.
Meeting Minutes of September
Council concur.
15, 2003
Council Meeting Minutes of
Approval of Council meeting minutes of September 15, 2003. Council concur.
September 15, 2003
Development Services:
Development Services Division recommended acceptance of dedication of
Reservoir Short Plat ROW
additional right-of-way at NW 3rd Ct. (a half cul-de-sac area of roadway) to
Dedication at NW 3rd Ct
fulfill a requirement of the Reservoir Short Plat (SHP-01-169). Council concur.
Utility: Springbrook Creek
Utility Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement with the
Floodplain Map Update,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to complete the Springbrook
FEMA
Creek floodplain map update. Council concur. (See page 345 for resolution.)
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 342
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS AMENDED TO
REMOVE ITEM 8.c. FOR SEPARATE CONSIDERATION. CARRIED.
Separate Consideration
City Clerk reported bid opening on 9/11/2003 for CAG-03-112, Maplewood
Item 8.c.
Water Treatment Facility and Golf Course Improvements; six bids; engineer's
CAG: 03-112, Maplewood
estimate $10,671,956; and submitted staff recommendation to award the
Water Treatment Facility and
contract to the low bidder, Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc., in the amount of
Golf Course Improvements,
$10,644,448.
Mid -Mountain Contractors
Responding to Councilman Persson's inquiry regarding funding for this project,
Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Gregg Zimmerman explained
that the project has a three-year duration and the funding will be supplied from
a combination of sources such as revenue bond issuance, a potential low -
interest Public Works Trust Fund loan, and residual equity (fund balance from
the utility rates).
Mr. Zimmerman confirmed that a 3.0 percent water system rate increase, the
first in eight years, will be proposed during the budget deliberations; however,
sufficient funding is available for the project without the rate increase..
Mayor Tanner stated that he is convinced that a water rate increase is necessary
for the overall benefit of the water utility. Mr. Zimmerman indicated that the
utilities revenue rate has been increasing at a slower pace than the expenditure
rate, and the capital fund reserves are now depleted.
Pointing out that this necessary project has been in the works for many years, it
was MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY BRIERE, COUNCIL
APPROVE THE BID AWARD AS PRESENTED.*
Responding to Council President Keolker Wheeler's inquiry regarding what
projects will be cut in order to pay for this project if a rate increase does not
occur, Mr. Zimmerman stated that the proposed 2004 Capital Improvements
Program would be reviewed to determine if any projects would need to be
deferred or delayed. He explained that the proposed rate increase would
stabilize the downward trend of the fund balances and avoid future rate spikes.
Councilman Corman pointed out that water supply structures in the Highlands
need updating in order to meet Federal government water quality requirements.
Mr. Zimmerman added that over the next few years, current water supply
quality advisory rules may change to water quality requirements, resulting in
the need for additional funding to institute the regulations.
*MOTION CARRIED.
Development Services: Council President Keolker-Wheeler inquired as to the status of the Reservoir
Reservoir Short Plat ROW Short Plat (SHP-01-169) now that Council has approved the dedication for
Dedication at NW 3rd Ct right-of-way (consent agenda item 8.d.). Mr. Zimmerman reported that the
project is currently being finalized and once the dedication is completed, the
short plat will be recorded with King County. He indicated that the
improvements are complete, the erosion problems have been stabilized, and
City staff has been working with the neighbors to address their concerns
regarding the project.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes .Page 343
OLD BUSINESS
MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY CORMAN,
AJLS: City Seal Copyright
COUNCIL REFER TO THE ADMINISTRATION THE ATTAINMENT OF A
COPYRIGHT FOR THE CITY OF RENTON CITY SEAL. CARRIED.
Finance Committee
. Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending the second
Finance: Bond Issuance, Water
and final reading of the bond ordinance approving the sale of $8,035,000 in
& Sewer Revenue Refunding
refunding water sewer revenue bonds. These bonds were sold on Thursday,
September 18, 2003. The bonds carried coupon interest rates of 2.0 percent to
3.7 percent, but were sold at a premium with yields of 1.1 percent to 3.7
percent. The City sold $8,035,000 in refunding bonds to refund $8,400,000 of
outstanding principal. However, due to the historically low interest rates, the
City will save $1,369,000 over the next ten years in interest payments.
MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN
THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 345 for ordinance.)
Finance: Vouchers
Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report recommending approval of
Claim Vouchers 218991--219388 and two wire transfers totaling
$1,971,581.01; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 46557 - 46791, one wire
transfer and 566 direct deposits totaling $1,726,000.09. MOVED BY
PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Public Works: Surplus of City- Finance Committee Chair Parker presented a report regarding the initiation of
Owned Property, 901 the surplus property procedure for Fire Station #12 located at 901 Harrington
Harrington Ave NE Ave. NE. The Committee recommended concurrence in the recommendation of
staff to approve the initiation of the surplus property procedures (City Policy &
Procedure #100-12), authorize Property Services to order an appraisal, and set a
public hearing on this matter for November 17, 2003. MOVED BY PARKER,
SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE
REPORT. CARRIED.
Transportation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Persson presented a report
Committee regarding the supplement to the consultant agreement with Robert Bernstein,
Transportation: NE 3rd/4th Inc. for the NE 3rd and 4th Street Corridor Study (CAG-0 1- 19 1). The
Street Corridor Study (CAG- Committee recommended that Council approve a budget adjustment in the
01-191), Fund Transfer Transportation Capital Improvement Fund (317) to transfer $19,800 from the
2003 Project Development and Pre -Design Program into this project. MOVED
BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Transportation: Duvall Ave Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Persson presented a report
NE Improvements King regarding the contract for the King County portion of the Duvall Ave. NE
County Portion, Berger/Abam Widening Project. The Committee recommended that Council:
Engineers . Add this additional King County Duvall Ave. CIP (Capital Improvement
Program) project to the 2003 Transportation budget pursuant to the TIP
(Transportation Improvement Program).
• Approve a budget adjustment in the Transportation Capital Improvement
Fund (317) to transfer $135,000 from the Duvall Ave. NE and NE Sunset
Blvd. to the City Limits Project 2003 allocation into this project. (The
overall total 2003 appropriation will not be revised.)
• Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into the proposed agreement
with Berger/Abam Engineers for design services for the Duvall Ave. NE
Widening Project in unincorporated King County.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 344
MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL. CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Responding to Councilman Clawson's question regarding the City's cost,
Councilman Persson stated that King County is paying for this portion of the
Duvall Ave. NE Widening Project, and the City of Renton is managing the
entire project.
Transportation: Lake WA Blvd
Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Persson presented a report
Slip Plane Project, Fund
recommending that Council approve the reallocation of funds in the amount of
Transfer
$120,000 from the Transit Priority Signal System Program (2003-2008 TIP #6)
to the Lake Washington Blvd. Slip Plane project (2004-2009 TIP #52). It is
further recommended that the project be added to the list of projects requiring
expenditures in 2003. *
Councilman Persson explained that a section of Lake Washington Blvd. is
slipping down the hill and could destroy a major sewer line. This fund
allocation is for the first portion of the project, which entails the engineering of
a wall to prevent the slippage. Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator
Gregg Zimmerman added that this area is close to the Newcastle city limits
*MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Utilities Committee
Utilities Committee Chair Corman presented a report regarding the Cedar River
Community Services:
Trail Integrated Pest Management. The Committee recommended concurrence
Integrated Pest Management
in the staff recommendation to proceed with formalizing an Integrated Pest
Program
Management Program modeled after the City of Portland, Oregon with the goal
of adopting a program that is Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliant. A
consultant will be hired with park experience, and citizen input will be solicited
during a public hearing review process. The Integrated Pest Management
Program will be presented to Council for review and adoption. MOVED BY
BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE
COMMITTEE REPORT.*
In response to Council President Keolker-Wheeler's inquiry regarding the study
performed by Cascadia Consulting Group regarding Integrated Pest
Management (IPM), PlanningBuilding/Public Works Administrator Gregg
Zimmerman confirmed that the study was completed and elements of the study
were put into effect. At the time, it was thought that the report would be
incorporated into the City's ESA response; thus the report was left as a final
draft and never formally adopted.
Ms. Keolker-Wheeler questioned why another study is needed when one has
already been completed. Councilman Parker stated that there have been
changes regarding the control of weeds and pests, and the new study will
address the changes in technology and review the City of Portland's IPM
program.
Leslie Betlach, Parks Director, explained that the Cascadia Consulting Group
report was financed by a Department of Ecology grant, and the study examined
how the City of Renton manages areas where chemicals could potentially be
used. One of the recommendations of the report was that the City adopt an IPM
policy, and Ms. Betlach noted that a number of suggestions from the report
have been utilized.
September 22, 2003 Renton City Council Minutes Page 345
Continuing, Ms. Betlach stated that Renton now needs to adopt policy, and
upon review of policies from other jurisdictions, staff discovered that the City
of Portland's IPM program consists of a policy and a plan that is ESA
compliant. She indicated that the City has adopted IPM practices but no
policies or ordinances. Ms. Betlach reported that funds in the amount of
$50,000 have already been budgeted for this project, and she is meeting with a
potential consultant this week.
Council President Keolker-Wheeler stated that she did not understand the need
to start over, and suggested that Cascadia Consultant Group finalize the report
and include information from the City of Portland's plan.
Councilman Clawson stated that the Cascadia report provided direction, and the
next step is to generate policies and implement the IPM program, which was
beyond the scope of the original project. Ms. Betlach added that the Cascadia
report was a broad analysis of how the City manages its public properties, and
the City of Portland's plan consists of a set of policies and procedures that are
more specific.
Councilwoman Briere reported that some comments and concerns raised by
citizens regarding the City's use of chemicals were very specific, and she stated
that the creation of a set of policies and procedures that address the specifics is
important.
*To allow more time for review, it was MOVED BY KEOLKER-WHEELER,
SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL TABLE THIS MATTER FOR TWO
WEEKS TO OCTOBER 6, 2003. CARRIED.
ORDINANCES AND
The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption:
RESOLUTIONS
Resolution #3660
A resolution was read authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an
Utility: Springbrook Creek
interlocal agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency
Floodplain Map Update,
(FEMA) regarding the Springbrook Creek floodplain map update. MOVED
FEMA
BY KEOLKER-WHEELER, SECONDED BY BRIERS, COUNCIL ADOPT
THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED.
The following ordinances were presented for second and final reading and
adoption:
Ordinance #5018
An ordinance was read amending Chapters 4-2, 4-3, and 4-4 of Title IV
Planning: Highlands
(Development Regulations) of City Code to allow urban style multi -family
Redevelopment Area,
housing in the Suburban Center Overlay District within the Highlands
Harrington Square
redevelopment area. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON,
COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL
AYES. CARRIED.
Ordinance #5019
An ordinance was read relating to the waterworks utility of the City, including
Finance: Bond Issuance, Water
the sewerage system as a part thereof; providing for the issuance of $8,035,000
& Sewer Revenue Refunding
aggregate principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds,
2003, of the City for the purpose of obtaining the funds with which to refund,
on a current basis, and defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer
Refunding and Improvement Revenue Bonds, 1993, and to advance refund and
defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994;
fixing the date, form, denominations, maturities, interest rates, terms and
covenants of the bonds; providing for bond insurance; and approving the sale
and providing for the delivery of the bonds to D.A. Davidson & Co., Seattle,
September 22, 2003
Renton City Council Minutes Page 346
Washington. MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL
ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES.
CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS
Councilman Persson complimented City staff and contractor, Gary Merlino
Streets: S Grady Way
Construction Company, on their handling of the traffic control for the S. Grady
Westbound Lanes Weekend
Way westbound lane closure needed for the pavement rehabilitation project.
Closures
Police: Staffing
MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER
THE MATTER OF POLICE DEPARTMENT STAFFING TO THE PUBLIC
SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT
MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL
ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 9:54 p.m.
' � 4 . wCL d 7�
BONNIE I. WALTON, City Clerk
Recorder: Michele Neumann
September 22, 2003
CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR
Office of the City Clerk
COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING
September 22, 2003
COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 9/29 No Meeting (5th Monday)
(Keolker-Wheeler)
COMMUNITY SERVICES
(Nelson)
FINANCE
(Parker)
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
(Briere)
PUBLIC SAFETY
(Clawson)
MON., 10/06 Emerging Issues;
6:00 p.m.
Information Technology Demonstration;
*Council
Regional Annexation Update
Conference
Room*
MON., 10/06
Steve Maxwell Appointment to Board of
5:30 p.m.
Adjustment
MON., 10/06
5:00 p.m.
THURS., 10/02
2:00 p.m.
TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) THURS., 10/02
(Persson) 4:00 p.m.
UTILITIES
(Corman)
THURS., 10/02
3:30 p.m.
Vouchers
2003 Comprehensive Plan Amendments
(Non -Boeing)
Rainier Ave. S. Corridor Study (briefing
only)
Private Street Lighting Systems
NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room
unless otherwise noted.
r
® Mobilizing staff - 75
people on board
® Engaging on -call
consultants
® Considering re -phasing
strategy for nickel.
projects
1
0
Proiect
Kick-off•
Ptoied Starts
N.a4enton EA
"Duty 2003
August,3003 -
Kirkland EA July 2003 '
January 3004
��South Renton/
July 2003 .<,
w5pnng,�004
a
.Tukwila EA '.
Bellevue EA :
July 2063
Spring 2004
6
wv4d !T v t'i�
Worstflrst
Fulfill'the.Vision
Build Logical Segments
tarty Environmental Action
Minimize Risk £rDelays
,Minimize Construction Impacts
Modal Balance,
Take Early Actions
a
2
DlA 'Renton:
Is �,
569ko Gad
A. Two additional lanes each"direction 1
`Auxiliary. {anes NE Park Drive'to Coat Creek
®,Reconfigurelnterchange's`, '
a SR'169 (split diamond with N 20realign Sunset)
Paik,, NE 30'^t,NE,44!", 112N Ave SE "
Braiding of ramps -at Coal Greek. '
6 HOV Investnierits
HOV by-pass on,on-ramps
® North 8t^ Direct Access
` -e NE 44a 00 siieetj Direct mci Y
• 112t^ Flyer Stop -
p "'Mcgmniodation for,plarined developments
1 ua Sg _
o:Design Refinements Scoping Mtg. 9/17/03
�`Kennydale Elementary School
7 attendees from the public
6A6i"dents,seem informed, aware of
environmental issues
o Written comments
w Noise concerns
® Property concerns
,o
3
its
e
South Re. htor",; It
bl
o;
m; ;1 lane each direction from I-S to SR'181
f:.
;.
®:24anes each direction fromSR 181.to'SR 169
e 1lane each direction on SR 167 from.l-5 to SW 43
o;
"SR 167 Interchange
a.` Separate.local access from "system to-systeii access "
r�
*'Renton access at Liod and Talbot
•. Reconnec't,Grady Way to East Valley Highviay
•-d GP and HOV direct "tamps , ' i.
�'
e ikov intact access'at Rainier Ave
O.
MORfM-
�CYLIr1iY'
V
4
"w
WA
Lq
ode ;Revi ions
ISSUE:
The Real Estate Signs Design Review Team has developed a series of
recommended amendments to Chapter 4 of Title 4 as part of its review of the
existing Real Estate Sign Code. These recommended amendments respond to
issues that have been presented to Council from home and business owners
throughout the City, and have been identified by staff as necessary code
amendments.
Some of the amendments include modifying the size and location of off -premise
real estate signs, clarifying which real estate signs are prohibited, and adding
real estate sign definitions. The amendments are being proposed in a continuing
effort to clarify and/or simplify the City's zoning and development regulations,
while ensuring that critical regulations are clearly stated, readily available and
enforceable.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Development Services Division is recommending to amend the real estate
sign and garage sale sign regulations in order to be more in line with current real
estate industry standards, while taking into consideration neighborhood impacts
along with the enforceability of the code._
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: August 27, 2003
TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: Real Estate Sign Design Team
STAFF CONTACT: Jason Jordan x7219
SUBJECT: Real Estate Sign Code Revisions
As requested at the August 21, 2003 Planning & Development Committee meeting I have
made some minor changes to the proposed real estate sign code amendments. For your use
and review, I have outlined the requested changes in blue. A quick recap of those changes
include: allowing text and logos on decorative flags, amending the proposed flag permit fee to
$25.00 per entrance, requiring an abutting property owner's approval for real estate directional
signs only if the abutting property is maintained or developed, modifying the real estate
directional sign permit to be valid for six months with a six month extension, and reducing the
real estate sign directional permit fee to $25.00.
ISSUE:
The Real Estate Signs Design Review Team has developed a series of recommended
amendments to Chapter 4 of Title 4 as part of its review of the existing Real Estate Sign Code.
These recommended amendments respond to issues that have been presented to Council
from home and business owners throughout the City, and have been identified by staff as
necessary code amendments. Some of the amendments include modifying the size and
location of off -premise real estate signs, clarifying which real estate signs are prohibited, and
adding real estate sign definitions. The amendments are being proposed in a continuing effort
to clarify and/or simplify the City's zoning and development regulations, while ensuring that _
critical regulations are clearly stated, readily available and enforceable.
This issue paper is slightly different from the standard issue paper format. Recommended
amendments are bulleted below, followed by code text amendments shown in underline and
strike -through legislative format.
RECOMMENDATION:
• RMC 4-4-100B6o, relating to exceptions from permit requirements: Staff recommends
amending this section of the sign code to coincide with the proposed sign code changes.
Specifically, staff is recommending that open house signs, freestanding signs and garage
sale signs be exempt from having to obtain a sign permit. This modification is necessary
as some of the real estate signs require sign permits, while others don't.
o. Real Estate Signs:
sale, lease 9F Font and RGt eXGeedinq rsix (65) 6quaFe feet in area Q-A AAA- faG8 OF 1966
area W.- Iets thiFty five thau6and (35,000) squaFe feet or les;s; iR area, and Rot 9XGeediA19
Open House signs, Free Standing
siqns and Garage Sale signs as described in Subsection J.
RMC 4-4-100136h, relating to Garage Sale Signs. Staff recommends adding "Garage
Sale Signs" to the list of signs that are exempt from sign permit requirements. Staff also
recommends adding a reference to the location of the revised garage sale sign information
within the code. This amendment would clarify that garage sale signs are exempt. The
amendment also directs users to the applicable garage sale sign code requirements.
Lastly, staff recommends inserting garage sale signs in alphabetical order as shown below.
h. Garage Sale Signs (See RMC 4-4-100J3)
Jai. Holiday Displays: Temporary signs and decorations customary for special holidays,
observed by the federal, state or municipal government erected entirely on private
property. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
+j. Memorial Signs: Memorial signs or tables, names of buildings and dates of erection,
when cut into any masonry surface or when constructed of bronze or other
incombustible materials. (Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996; Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
fk. Modifications Not Requiring Structural or Electrical Changes:
i. Outside of City Center: Painting, repainting or cleaning of an advertising
structure or the changing of the advertising copy or message thereon shall
not be considered an erection or alteration which requires sign permit unless
a structural or electrical change is made. (Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996; Amd. Ord.
4720, 5-4-1998)
ii. Inside City Center Sign Regulation Boundaries: Painting, repainting or
cleaning of an advertising structure shall not be considered an erection or
alteration which requires sign permit unless a structural or electrical change
is made. A change of sign face shall be subject to permit requirements. (Ord.
4720, 5-4-1998; Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
ki. Open House Signs. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
tm. Political Signs: Political signs less than twelve (12) square feet on one face as
herein defined. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
fRn. Public Art: Sculptures, wall paintings, murals, collages, banners and other design
features which do not incorporate advertising or identification, consistent with the
provisions and procedures of the Public Art Exemption, RMC 4-9-160. (Amd. Ord.
4848, 6-26-2000)
,Ro. Public Service Signs: Nonadvertising and nonpromotional signs such as citizen
recognition signs, neighborhood welcome signs, signs indicating scenic or historic
points of interest, or other signs of similar nature as determined by the Development
Services Division. Such signs may be located in any zone and shall require approval
of the Development Services Division. These signs may be located on or over public
rights -of -way with approval of the sign placement by the City of Renton
Transportation Systems Division. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
op. Real Estate Signs: Real estate signs offering the immediately adjacent premises for
sale, lease or rent and not exceeding six (6) square feet in area on one face or less in
area for lots thirty five thousand (35,000) square feet or less in area, and not
exceeding thirty two (32) square feet in area on one face for lots over thirty five
thousand (35,000) square feet in area. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
pg. Safety Information Signs: Signs of public service companies indicating danger
and/or service or safety information. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
qr. Small Parking and Traffic Control Signs: Parking and traffic control signs two (2)
square feet or less on private property. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
rs. Small Wall Signs: One on -premises sign, not electrical or illuminated, two (2) square
feet or less on one face which is affixed permanently on a plane parallel to the wall on
the wall located entirely on private property. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
st. Weekend and Holiday Display Signage for Vehicle and Vessel Sales in the Auto Mall
Overlay Districts: Balloons, with no limit on size or number per site, may be displayed
on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays, federal legal holidays and December 26 — 31.
(Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
tu. Banner Signage for Vehicle and Vessel Sales in the Auto Mall Overlay Districts:
Wall -hung and pole -hung banners are permitted as follows:
i. Wall -Hung Banner Size and Location Limitations: Wall -hung banners shall not
exceed one hundred (100) square feet in size. There are no restrictions on the
number per wall or number per site. Wall -hung banners shall not cover up
permanent signage or address numbers.
ii. Pole -Hung Banner Size and Location Limitations: Pole -hung banners shall not
exceed twenty (20) square feet in size. No more than one pole -hung banner shall
be located on any on -site pole or light standard. There are no restrictions on the
number of pole -hung banners per site. (Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
• RMC 4-4-100C4, regarding exceptions from prohibited signs and devices. Staff
suggests an amendment to allow "decorative real estate flags" This change is necessary
as developers have begun utilizing decorative flags to denote the entrance to their
subdivisions.
4. Devices of a Carnival Nature: Balloons, flags, pennants/streamers, wind -animated
objects, searchlights, inflatable statuary, and similar devices of a carnival nature except
as specifically provided in subsections B6, Exemptions from Permit Requirements, E4.
Decorative Real Estate Flags and A Event Signs, of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-
26-2000)
• RMC 4-4-100C9&10, regarding signs located within the public right-of-way and off
premise signs. Staff suggests a text amendment, which clarifies that certain temporary
real estate signs are allowed within the public right-of-way and can be located off -
premises.
9. Signs on Public Right -of -Way: Signs on public right-of-way other than temporary and
portable signs allowed by subsection ;
1 1 1 1 PelitiGal , an
1
A Frame J, of this Section; and subsections 136b, City Sponsored Signs; 136c, City
Sponsored or Co -Sponsored Signs and Displays; 136n, Public Service Signs; 136p,
Safety Information Signs; and I, Signs on Public Right -of -Way, of this Section. (Ord.
3719, 4-11-1983; Amd. Ord. 4832, 3-6-2000; Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
10. Off -Premises Signs: Except temporary and portable -signs allowed by subsections
J of this
Section; City sponsored signs and public service signs per subsections 136b, City
Sponsored Signs; 136c, City Sponsored or Co -Sponsored Signs and Displays; and 136n,
Public Service Signs, of this Section. (Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Amd. Ord. 4629, 8-19-
1996; Ord. 4832, 3-6-2000; Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000)
• RMC 4-4-100C16, regarding prohibited real estate signs. Staff suggests new text,
which clarifies the types of real estate signs that are prohibited within the City. Staff
believes that this section (Prohibited Signs and Devices) is the most appropriate section to
place prohibited real estate signs.
16. Real Estate Signs:
a. Any off -premise real estate sign, except open house and real estate
directional signs.
b. In no case shall any real estate sign be less than four (4) square feet
except for open house signs.
#:c Any off -premise real estate sign located at the same intersection corner,
or location as an approved Public Service Sign or Public Art.
GA. Any real estate sign closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public
roadway.
e. Any real estate sign placed in a manner as to constitute a public safety
hazard as determined by the Development Services Division.
RMC 4-4-100E4ai, regarding decorative flags located on properties developed as
apartment buildings and subdivisions. Staff suggests a text amendment, which allows
apartments and subdivisions to erect decorative real estate flags at entrances to their
developments. Staff has noted a proliferation of these decorative flags throughout the City,
however, they are not currently allowed nor does the City require a sign permit. These
proposed modifications would allow the decorative flags subject to the approval of a sign
permit.
Decorative Flags: Apartment buildings, residential subdivision
developments and similar occupancies located in residential and
mixed -use zones may also display decorative flags in accordance
with the following requirements:
(a) Permit Requirements: Permit Required.
(b) Sign Type: A lightweight fabric or similar material t#1at
GGRtaiAG RE) text OF l9gG6, supported by a vertical or
horizontal staff,
(c) Allowed Uses: Multi -family residential complexes and
subdivisions of 10 or more units or lots.
(d) Maximum Size: Each flag shall not exceed twenty-five (25)
square feet.
(e) Maximum Height: Flags, including the supports, shall not
exceed the height limitations for the zone in which it is
located,
(f) Sign/Pole Location: Only permissible when located within
one hundred (100) feet of the entrance to a subdivision or a
multi -family development. The sign/pole shall be located on
the development premises and shall be setback a minimum
of one -foot from the property line for each foot in height.
• RMC 4-4-100E4c&d, regarding real estate sign permits. Staff proposes to eliminate this
section of the code as it is discussed under the revised real estate sign permit section.
ec. Temporary Signs: Temporary signs per subsection J of this Section are
allowed, except for cloth signs over public right-of-way. (Ord. 3719, 4-11-1983;
Amd. Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Amd. Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998)
fd. Public Facilities (Public Buildings, Schools, Parks and Recreation Facilities)
Each individual public facility may have one freestanding electronic or manual
message board, a maximum of twenty five feet (25') in height and one hundred
fifty (150) square feet in size. In addition to the message board sign, each
individual facility may have one freestanding sign not higher than six feet (6')
above any established grade for each street frontage and no more than one
hundred (100) square feet. Freestanding signs shall be no closer than ten feet
(10') to any street right-of-way or five feet (6) to any side property line. In
addition to the freestanding signs, wall signs are permitted with a total copy
area not exceeding ten percent (10%) of the building facade to which it is
applied. (Ord. 4766, 3-1-1999)
• RMC 4-4-100J2-3, regarding real estate sign permits. Staff proposes to completely
revise this portion of the real estate sign code so that the code is more in line with existing
real estate industry standards and expectations. The following represents the deletion of
the existing real estate code language, which is then followed by new real estate code
language.
._
IM
M—WiNd
-
-_ ..
01MI. MY
.
..
RMC 4-4-100J2, regarding prohibited real estate signs. Staff proposes to add
prohibited real estate signs within the real estate sign code section of Chapter 4, Title 4.
This would clarify which real estate signs are not allowed within the City limits (please
note that these prohibited -signs are also proposed to -be listed -under prohibited signs, -
general).
2. Real Estate Signs :
a. PROHIBITED REAL ESTATE SIGNS:
i. See RMC4-4-100C16
ii. No balloons or other attention -attracting devices may be attached to
real estate signs.
RMC 4-4-100J2b, regarding off -premise open house real estate signs. Staff
proposes to distinguish between off -premise real estate signs amongst other types of
real estate signs. One example of an off -premise sign is an open house sign. Staff has
attempted to clarify the display duration and location of off -premise signs.
b. OFF -PREMISE REAL ESTATE SIGNS:
i. OPEN HOUSE SIGNS
(a) Permit Requirements: No permit required.
(b) Maximum Display Period: In no case shall an open house sign be
displayed longer than any 12 hours in a 24 hour period. A seller or
their representative shall be present at the property for sale, rent
or lease, while the open house sign is being displayed.
(c) Allowed Use: For directing potential customers to the site of real
estate that is for sale, rent, or tease.
(d) Allowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated portable sign comprised
of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter
"A". The sign text must include the words `open house". "for sale".
"for rent", or "for lease".
(e) Maximum Size: Four (4) square feet in surface area for each face
of the sign.
(f) Sign Location: Signs may be placed no closer than 4 feet to the
edge of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the
vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
(g) Maximum Number: Four (4) off -premises signs per property for
sale, rent or lease.
(h) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed 10 feet from finished grade.
RMC 4-4-100J2bii-iii, regarding off -premise real estate directional signs. Staff
proposes to distinguish between off -premise real estate directional signs outside of the
City Center Sign Regulation Boundary and inside the City Center Sign Regulation
Boundary. Developers have stressed that downtown projects require different real estate
sign requirements than developments located outside of the downtown area. Therefore,
staff is proposing two real estate directional sign standards (outside and inside the
downtown), which are very similar except for sign location and spacing.
REAL ESTATE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS(Outside of the City Center
Sign Regulation Boundary as depicted in RMC 4-4-1001-13):
(a) Permit Requirements: Permit required. When located in the
public right-of-way an applicant must have the approval of the
abutting property owner or representative if the abutting property
owner or representative is maintaining the right-of-way where the
sign is proposed to be located.
(b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of six (6) months with a six
(6) month extension.
(c) Allowed Use: These signs are intended for the original sale, rental,
or lease of property divided into 10 or more lots or for a newly
created multi -family complex of 10 or more units for sale, rent or
lease within the corporate limits of the City of Renton. The
Development Services Division may also approve these signs for
use by multi -family complexes that have completed major
renovation in excess of 50% of appraised structure value of at
least ten (10) rental units located within the corporate limits of
Renton. The real estate directional sign permit shall not be
approved if the development is 75% or more occupied or sold.
(d) Allowable Sign Type: Any non -illuminated type of freestanding
sign.
(e) Maximum Size: Twelve (12) square feet on one face.
(f) Sign Location: Must be within two (2) miles (driving distance on a
Public roadway) of the premises it advertises. Signs may be placed
no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway,
provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of
vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
(g) Maximum Number Per Intersection: A maximum of two (2) real
estate directional signs shall be allowed at any one intersection
and only one sign per development shall be allowed at each
intersection.
(h) Minimum Spacing Between Intersections: Real estate directional
signs shall be placed no closer than five hundred (500) feet to any
other real estate directional sign and no closer than 100 feet to an
intersection.
(i) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten 00) feet from finished
grade.
iii. REAL ESTATE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS (Within the City Center Sign
Regulation Boundary as depicted in RMC 4-4-1001-13):
(a) Permit Reguirements: Permit re uired. When located in the public
right-of-way an applicant must have the approval of the abutting
property owner or representative if the abutting property owner or
representative is maintaining the right-of-way where the sign is
proposed to be located.
(b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of six (6) months with a six (6)
month extension.
(c) Allowed Use: These signs are intended for the original sale,
rental, or lease of property divided into 10 or more lots or for a
newly created multi -family development of 10 or more units for
sale, rent or lease within the corporate limits of the City of Renton.
The Development Services Division may also approve these signs
for use by multi -family developments that have completed maior
renovation in excess of 50% of appraised structure value of at
least ten (10) rental units located within the corporate limits of
Renton. The real estate directional sign permit shall not be
approved if the development is 75% occupied or sold.
(d) Allowable Sign Type: Any non -illuminated freestanding sign and
A -frame signs.
(e) Maximum Size: thirty-two inches wide by thirty-six inches tall (32
inches by 36 inches) per face.
(f) Sign Location: Must be within two (2) miles (driving distance on a
public roadway) of the premises it advertises. Signs may be placed
no closer than four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway,
provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway of
vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
(g) Maximum Number Per Intersection: A maximum of two (2) real
estate directional signs shall be allowed at any one intersection
and only one sign per development shall be allowed at each
- - - - - - - -- - - - - intersection. -
(h) Minimum Spacing Between Intersections: Real estate directional
signs shall be placed no closer than one -hundred (100) feet to any
other real estate directional sign and fifty (50) feet from an
intersection.
(i) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from finished
grade.
RMC 4-4-100J2c, regarding on -premise real estate signs. Staff proposes to
distinguish between off -premise real estate signs and on -premise real estate signs in
order to provide the development/real estate community with greater flexibility of sign
location, duration and placement. The proposed regulations would also provide Code
Enforcement staff with appropriate measures to control real estate signs. One example
of an on -premise real estate sign is a freestanding real estate sign (what is typically seen
in the front yard of a house that is for sale or rent). These signs are generally smaller in
size and do not require a sign permit.
C. ON PREMISES REAL ESTATE SIGNS
L FREESTANDING REAL ESTATE SIGN
(a) Permit Requirements: No permit required.
(b) Maximum Display Period: For the period of time the property is for
sale,rentor lease. For multi -family complexes of five (5) or more
units the freestanding real estate sign shall_ not be allowed if the
development is 75% occupied or sold.
(c) Allowed Use: For real estate that is for sale.. rent or lease.
(d) Allowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated freestanding sign
indicating that the property, which the sign is located on is for sale,
rent or lease.
(e) Maximum Size:
1. For lots thirty-five thousand (35,000) square feet or less in
area: Six (6) square feet in area per face: or
2. For lots -greater than thirty-five (35,000) square feet in area:
Thirty-two (32) square feet in area per face,
(f) Sign Location: These signs must be located on the premise that is
for sale rent or lease. These signs may be placed no closer than
four (4) feet to the edge of a public roadway, provided that they do
not obstruct the vision or pathway of vehicular or pedestrian traffic.
(g) Maximum Number: One (1) sign per street frontage.
(h) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten 00) feet from finished
grade.
RMC 4-4-100J2cii, regarding on -premise real estate signs. Staff proposes new
real estate sign code language that distinguishes between residential and
commercial development. Specifically, the commercial development community has
indicated a preference for commercial real estate banner signs (placed on the
building); however, the residential development community prefers these types of
signs as special event signs (i.e. grand opening) instead of temporary real estate
signs. Therefore, staff has drafted proposed commercial banner real estate sign
language that provides commercial buildings with an opportunity to display this type
of sign, provided they comply with the sign location and duration requirements.
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BANNER SIGNS:
(a) Permit Requirements: Permit required.
(b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twelve (12) months.
(c) Allowed Use: For sale rent or lease of commercial property. Real
Estate Banners shall not be utilized by residential development.
(d) Allowable Sian Type: A sign of any shape made of lightweight
fabric or similar material. The sign must indicate "For Sale, Rent,
or Lease."
(e) Maximum Size: Fifty (50) square feet.
(f) Sign Location: Only permissible when mounted to a building that
is for sale, rent, or lease.
(g) Maximum Number: One (1) per street frontage.
RMC 4-4-100J3, regarding garage sale signs. Staff proposes to add garage sale
sign language to the temporary sign section of the municipal code in order to
provide citizens with clear guidelines as to the location and duration of garage sales
signs. As such, staff is not proposing any additional permits for garage sale signs
but is instead clarifying where and for how long those signs may be displayed.
3. Garage Sale Signs:
(a) Permit Requirements: No permit required.
(b) Maximum Display Period: Maximum of twenty-four (24) hours prior to the
start of the sale and a maximum of twenty-four (24) hours after the sale is
completed.
(c) Allowed Uses: For directing potential customers to the garage sale site.
(d) Allowable Sign Type: A non -illuminated freestanding sign or an A -frame
sign•
(e) Maximum Size: Thirty-two inches wide by thirty-six inches tall (32" x 36"
inches).
(f) Sign Location: Signs may be placed no closer than four (4) feet to the edge
of a public roadway, provided that they do not obstruct the vision or pathway
of vehicular or edestrian traffic. The signs shall not be attached to utility
poles, traffic controlling devises or any other public structure.
(g) Maximum Height: Shall not exceed ten (10) feet from finished grade.
RMC 4-4-100J6a, regarding Event Sign Applicability. Staff proposes to add
"residential' to the applicability section of the event signs, which would allow
residential uses to utilize temporary event signage.
6. Event Signs:
a. Applicability: Commercial, industrial, residential, public, and quasi -public
uses and mixed -use developments (commercial combined with multi -family
residential) may display event signage in compliance with the following
regulations. These regulations apply to use of signs for grand opening events or
for periodic special events....
RMC 4-4-1000, regarding violations and penalties. Staff proposes to add this section to
the sign code in order to successfully levy penalties against sign code violators.
U. Violations of this Chapter and Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the
provisions of this Chapter shall be in accord with Chapter 1-3 RMC.
• RMC 4-11-110, regarding real estate sign definitions. Staff proposes to add four new
real estate sign definitions in order to assist City staff and the community with interpreting
the revised real estate sign code.
J. Real Estate Signs:
1. Commercial Real Estate Banner Sign: A sign of any shape made of
lightweight fabric or similar material that is mounted to a building by any
means, and indicating that the property is for sale, rent, or lease. National
flags, state or municipal flaps, holiday flaps, or the official flag of any
institution or business shall not be considered banners. -- -- -
2. Decorative Real Estate Flap: A portion of lightweight fabric or similar
material , supported by a vertical or horizontal
staff, intended to flutter in the wind, and is used to attract attention to any
type of residential development for sale, rent, or lease. National flaps, state
or municipal flags, holiday flaps, or the official flag of any institution or
business shall not be considered banners.
3. Freestanding Real Estate Signs: Any type of non -illuminated
freestanding sign, indicating that the property on which it is located, is for
sale, rent, or lease. This sign type includes yardarm or ground signs.
4. Open House Sign: A non -illuminated type of portable sign comprised of
hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A." no larger
than 4 square feet in surface area for each sign face. The sign text for an
Open House Sign contains the phrase: 'open house" or "for sale" or "for
rent" or "for lease."
5. Real Estate Directional Sign: Any non -illuminated type of freestanding
sign that provides direction to property(ies) for sale, rent, or lease. Within
the City Center Sign Regulation Boundaries (as shown in RMC 4-4-100HI
real estate directional signs may also include portable signs comprised of
hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A".
dK. Sign, Rigid Portable: A sign which is not permanently affixed and
designed for or capable of movement. Those signs explicitly designed for
people to carry on their persons or which are permanently affixed to motor
vehicles are considered to be rigid portable signs. A rigid portable sign is not
considered to be a portable readerboard or "trailer sign."
KL. Sign, Window: Any sign, temporary or permanent, designed to
communicate information about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale,
or service, that is placed inside a window. Interior display of merchandise for
sale, including accessory mannequins and other props, shall not be considered
window signs.
LM. Wind -Animated Object: Any device, e.g., windsocks, pinwheels, whirligigs, etc.,
whose primary movements are caused by the wind or atmospheric conditions, attached
by a tether. A balloon or inflatable statuary, with or without moveable parts, is not
considered a wind -animated object.
• RMC 4-1-140M3 regarding real estate sign fees. Staff proposes to amend the sign
permit fees as noted below. While some of the fees are proposed to increase; the duration
of the permit validity in some cases has been extended.
RMC 4-1-140M3
TEMPORARY AND
Fee Amount
PORTABLE SIGNS:
Real Estate Directional Signs
125.00per sign, permit valid
for a six (6) month period with
pursuant to RMC 4-4-100J2
a six (6) month renewal fee of
$25.00
Grand Opening Event Signs,
$25.00 per site, per opening
pursuant to RMC 4-4-
100J6d 1
Event Signs, pursuant to
$15.00 per type of sign
RMC 4-4-100J6d(2) and (3)
identified in RMC 4-4-100J6b,
er romotion
A -Frame Signs, pursuant to
$100.00 for the first sign and
RMC 4-4-100J5
$50.00 for each additional
sign, for a 12-month period
Commercial Property Real
$50 per sign, permit valid for
a 12-month eriod
Estate Banner
Decorative Flags 20 Per entrance, permit valid
until fla s removed
Conclusion:
The proposed code amendments outlined above represent revisions to the real estate sign
code that is more in line with current real estate industry standards, while taking into
consideration neighborhood impacts along with enforceability of the code. In addition, staff
has attempted to carefully consider which signs should be subject to a sign permit and the
amount of staff time involved with each permit. This provided staff with a baseline of what
each required sign permit fee might be in terms of actual dollars spent on processing the
permits. If you have specific questions about this proposal, please feel free to contact Jason
Jordan at (425) 430-7219.
Real Estate & Garage
Sale Signs
Proposed Code Amendments
Real Estate Sign
• There are many different sign types;
• And many different regulations.
► � �� �ja,.�_s 1 w
3 i
i tiff ��IfIL��t i
choice _
Value
- • � • 4M r �"'q F-Cd �.s Ll�_ .-ser'.�.1- uY�t� .
-14
Real Estate Directional Sign
Fyt-x�
+•e. �,.��
��' t,"' t
� s � fir.. �.�':•
�
'
"�.,
t �i,.
11WI
10
t- .W� f "t
r• '•1., p '� •+ 4' ,}i
"
`"
r
r a h c F ry
•1 f
��."
t
� .�
iY:..... �� A'M�y t.Rk:. ,�»µ 'tr
4, "''� i
{ �.
,
�ik _ r.•=� may:
111 +w
S4:
The Issues
• Real estate sign requirements were determined to
be dated and confusing;
• Real estate and garage sale sign regulations were
scattered throughout entire sign regulations;
• Some sections of the real estate sign code were
found to be unenforceable;
• Garage sale sign code requirements did not
specify location and duration.
Recommendation
emend the Real Estate and Garage Sale
sign regulations in order to:
— Clarify what and where the signs are allowed
— Organize the real estate sign code section
— Simplify the sign code regulations for the
public and city staff
— Create enforceable sign code regulations
Examples
• Allow decorative flags in residential areas;
• Specify where & how long off -premise open
house signs are valid;
• Distinguish requirements for real estate directional
signs located inside the City Center and outside of
the center;
• Clarify the location, area and size for on -premise
real estate signs;
d
Examples Continued
• Specify the location and duration of garage sale
signs;
• Provide clear and concise real estate sign type
definitions;
• Amend the fee tables to reflect revised permitted
display periods; and
• Provide language needed in order to enforce the
real estate sign regulations.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003
CCTV COUNCIL
Date_ 9-a2-a003
The Planning & Development Committee convened to consider the appeal of the decision
of the Hearing Examiner dated July 3, 2003. The subject property is located at 400
Olympia Avenue NE, Renton, Washington. The applicant, H. Lee Johnson, of BDJS
Associates, sought approval for the construction of a 27,528 square foot retail, office and
creative workspace building. The applicant also requested modifications of the required
setbacks along both Olympia and NE 4th street.
The Hearing Examiner did not appfov,e the :sit6 plan at4requested modifications, stating
that the building was too large.'for the:site and inconsistent with the Center Suburban
(CS) zoning in which it is located Bo h the Applicant and City.staff requested the
Hearing Examiner reconsider`his decision. The request was prompted by City staffs
belief that they had incorrectly designated, the front and side 'yards". of the building, thus
applying the incorrect setbacks.The'motiori for reconsideration was denied and an
appeal to the City Council followed
FINDINGS OF FACT"...
e fr
(1) The Committee finds that,the proper orientation of the proposed building places
the front yard along the Olympia Ave. NE frontage, making the required setback a
minimum of ten feet.
3
(2) The Committee finds the buildingras,,proposed -would provide only a five-foot
setback, thus requiring a modification.
(3) The Committee finds the requested front yard setback to be minor in nature.
(4) The Committee finds that the proper orientation of the proposed building places
the side yard along the NE 4th street frontage, making the required setback a
minimum of ten feet, with no maximum required.
(5) The Committee finds the building as proposed provides a sixty -foot setback, thus
no modification is required.
(6) The Committee finds the project as proposed consistent with the Center Suburban
(CS) zoning goals.
Planning & Development Committee Report
Urban Crafts
Page 2
(7) The Committee finds the proposed building's lot coverage of approximately 25%
makes it of appropriate size and proportion for the subject lot.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
(1) Based on an incorrect orientation of the proposed building, placing the front yard
along NE 4th street, the Hearing Examiner's Finding of Fact 416 states a maximum
setback of 15 feet is required. This is a substantial error of fact.
(2) Based on the error of fact found in Finding of Fact #16, the Hearing Examiner
erroneously concluded that the proposed building did not meet the required front yard
setbacks. This was a substantial error of law.
(3) The Hearing Examiner's determination, in both the initial hearing and the motion
for reconsideration, that the proposed building was too large for the subject site, was a
substantial error of fact.
RECOAEWENDATIONS
The Committee recommends that the City Council approve -the requested front yard setback
modification along Olympia Ave. NE.
The Committee further recommends the City Council approve the site plan with the
conditions proposed on page.l0 of the :Dearing Examiner's decision dated July 3, 2003.
Terri Brie e, Chair
King Parker, Member
C: Jeennifer Henning
IAa l�azy��
CITY OF RENTON
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 22, 2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
FROM: Jesse Tanner, Mayor
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
SUBJECT: Administrative Report
In addition to our day to -day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week:
ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL, AND LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
• A seventeen -member delegation from Renton's Sister City, Cuautla, Jalisco, Mexico, will visit Renton on
Monday, September 22°d, through Friday, September 26d'. Members of the visiting delegation include the
Mayor of Cuautla, other public officials, business representatives, and educators. A variety of activities are
planned to showcase the Renton community and entertain the special guests. This Sister City relationship
enables citizens of both communities to gain a mutual awareness and appreciation of the different cultures
and allows citizens from each community to participate in the educational, economic, and professional
exchanges.
• Six special individuals will be honored as Outstanding Citizens for Renton at a banquet in October. Of
those six, one will be named Renton's Citizen of the Year. The Citizen of the Year banquet will be held on
Thursday, October 9d', at 5:00 p.m. at the Renton Senior Activity Center. Cost per person is $25 and
reservations can be made on line at www.renton-chamber.com or by calling the Greater Renton Chamber of
Commerce at 425-2264560. Reservations are requested by October 3`d. Sponsored by the City of Renton,
Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce, and Rotary Club of Renton, the Citizen of the Year program
formally recognizes the contributions made by individuals who help to nurture the soul and sense of
community in Renton through their selfless acts of generosity and volunteerism.
COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT
• Shop at participating Albertsons, Safeway, QFC, Thriftway, or Fred Meyer and purchase a few items for
donation on Saturday, September 27`h, during the Mayor's Day of Concern for the Hungry. Your
contribution will help to make sure no child or family goes hungry this winter, a time when some families
are often forced to make a choice between food and heat. This program is coordinated with local cities and
the Emergency Feeding Program. Donations collected locally will benefit local residents. For additional
information call 206-723-0647.
• Dogs and their owners will have their own designated off -leash area in south King County when the new
Grandview Park is dedicated and opened on Saturday, October 40', at 10:00 a.m., made possible through the
cooperative efforts of King County, Serve Our Dog Area, and the cities of SeaTac, Auburn, Burien, Des
Moines, Federal Way, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila. The new off -leash area is located at Grandview Park, a
37-acre facility located in the City of SeaTac at South 228th Street and Military Road South.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, & STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT
• The City of Renton Neighborhood Grant Program has launched its second round of grant funding and has
$46,700 remaining for 2003 projects. The grants are available to residents of neighborhoods who have
organized to plan and implement projects for the purpose of improving the viability and livability of their
neighborhoods. Grant applications are due on Friday, October 3`d, at 5:00 p.m. For additional information,
call 425-430-6595.
Administrative Report
September 22, 2003
Page 2
FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES DEPARTMENT
• Last Thursday the City refunded $8 million in water sewer bonds. During this process, the City asked Fitch
Rating Agency and Standard and Poor's to review the City's financials to determine a rating for the bonds.
Both agencies rated our bonds as AA-, an upgrade from Standard and Poor's previous rating of A+ for the
City. Standard and Poor's wrote: "The upgrade reflects the underlying economy's higher -than -average
wealth levels and the independence of the utility's water supply, plus a financial performance marked by
continued strong debt service coverage and cash liquidity. The outlook is stable. " The City sold the
refunding bonds through D.A. Davidson, with most of the bonds selling last Thursday. Because of
historically low interest rates, the City will save $1.3 million over the next ten years. The coupon rates
were between 2% and 3.7% as compared with the previous rates of 5.0% to 5.375%.
PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
• The 2003 annual street overlay program paving was completed last week. Finish -up work, such as
adjusting valve boxes and lane striping, is still being done.
This last weekend work was performed on the first of two weekend westbound street closures for the Grady
Way approach to Rainier Avenue. Sections of the asphalt roadway are being replaced with rigid concrete
pavement. The second and final westbound street closure is scheduled for next weekend, September 27"'
through the 29d', from 7:00 a.m. on Saturday until 5:00 a.m. on Monday. Westbound drivers on Grady Way
will be detoured north on Shattuck to Southwest Seventh Street, where they can access Rainier Avenue
during these closures.
POLICE DEPARTMENT
• During the week of September 23-29, the Police Department will be conducting traffic emphasis in the
following areas:
Renton Police Department Traffic Enforcement Emphasis
September 23-29
Date
6:00 a.m. to Noon
Noon to 6:00 p.m.
All Da
Motorcycles/Cars
Motorcycles/Cars
Radar Trailer
September 23, Tuesday
1100 blk, Carr Rd (speed)
Williams/Grad Way (stop sign)
City Hall/Benson Rd (lane change)
Rainier Ave N (speed)
2600 blk, NE 7th St
September 24, Wednesday
Rainier Ave N (speed)
SW Sunset Blvd (turns/speed)
Maple Valley Hwy (speed)
El
2600 blk, NE 7 St
September 25, Thursday
Rainier/Grady Way (red lights)
Rainier Ave N (speed)
Rainier Ave N (speed)
200 blk, S 2nd St (speed)
2300 blk, Talbot Rd S
September 26, Friday
1100 blk, Carr Rd (speed)
1400 blk, Houser Way N (speed)
200 blk, S 2° St (speed)
Cit Hall/Benson Rd (lane chan e)
2300 blk, Talbot Rd S
September 29, Monday
Rainier Ave N (speed)
Edmonds Ave SE (speed)
Maple Valley Hwy (speed)
Rainier Ave N (speed)
1300 blk, N 3` St
9-aa-os
TENANT'S NOTICE TO VACATE. �`afc0�la>
To: Rev. William Plant, property owner/landlord
Mike Burkhart, co tenant and purported, agent of property owner/landlord
-City Leaders with regard to Code Compliance
Date: Monday, 9/22/03
Please take notice of the following:
(1) The existence of an oral rental agreement between Rev. Plant and myself governed
by RCW 59.18, State Landlord -Tenant Act which provided lodgings to myself in
exchange for services.
(2) Illegal eviction notice by Renton Police on
(3) Illegal eviction notice from Mike Burkhart and Rev Plant dated 9/19103
(4) Illegal shut-off of electricity by Mike Burkhart for which I will bring civil action under
RCW 59.18.
Please take notice of my intention to vacate the trailer located at 311 Smithers,
Renton, WA, by October 31, 2003. 1 am giving notice in accordance with RCW 59.18,
which requires notice by the 10th of the month effective at the end of the month. It is
too late in the month for me to give legal notice to the landlord effective September 30,
2003; therefore, this Notice to Vacate is provided by the 10th of October to be effective
October 31, 2003; and I will consider my oral rental agreement officially and legally
terminated on that date and not before.
Please take notice that the reason I am leaving is that the trailer in which I have
been residing for several years, and for the past 14 months at 311 Smithers, cannot
legally be rented according to City Code in the City of Renton in the Downtown Core
zoning area.
Please take notice that rental of property which violates City Code should be
handled between the property owner/landlord and the City, then the property
owner/landlord would take appropriate action to remove the tenant. Thus far, the
property owner/landlord have not acted within the law. My Notice to Vacate, however,
is legal and tendered herewith.
Tenant: r �r
FINANCE COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003
C6TV Ot3U CIL.
Date 9-.AA- A003 I
APPROVE THE SALE OF $8.035 MILLION IN REFUNDING WATER SEWER REVENUE BONDS
WITH THE SECOND AND FINA.L READING OF THE BOND ORDINANCE.
(Referred September 8, 2003)
The Finance Committee recommends the second and final reading of the bond ordinance
approving the sale of $8.035 million in refunding water sewer revenue bonds. These bonds
were sold on Thursday, September. 18." The bonds carried,coupon interest rates of 2.0 percent
to 3.7 percent, but were sold at,,a premium with, yields of 1-:1 percent to 3.7 percent. We sold
$8.035 million in refunding bonds' to refund $8:4-million of'outstanding principal. However,
due to the historically low interest rates, the City will Save $1369 million over the next ten
years in interest payments.,
ndy Gorman, vice Chair
cm
Don Persson, Member
VAR/dif
cc:
Victoria Runkle, Finance & IS Administrator
Elaine Gregory, Fiscal Service Director
2003 final Water Sewer Refunding Bonds.doc\ Rev 01/02 bh
FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003
AP0V By
CITY COUNCIL
3.
Date
APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS
The Finance Committee approves for payment on September 22, 2003, claim vouchers 218991-
219388 and 2 wire transfers, totaling $1,971,581.01 , and 566 direct deposits, payroll vouchers
46557-j0794-,a �wiN transfer, tot ,g $1,726,000.09 .
1APPROVED BY
CIS COUNCIL
®ate 1 a4—
FINANCE COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003
Initiation of Surplus Property Procedure for Fire Station 12
located at 901 Harrington Avenue Northeast
. (Referred September 8, 2003)
The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in staff s recommendation to approve the
initiation of the Surplus Property Procedures. (Policy,,,& Procedures 100-12), authorize
Property Services to order an -appraisal, and set a public hearing on this matter for
Novemb 203
�.. 3
King Parker, Chair`
r ,
cc:
Lys. Hornsby
David Christensen
Gregory Stroh .
Karen McFarland
1:\COMMITTE\Reports\Finance\2003\FS I2Surplus.rpt.doc\KLM\tb
APPRovc-D By
TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE �� ������ a
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003 Date _ Q-aa -a003
Project: Budget Adjustment for Supplement to Consultant Agreement with Robert
Bernstein, Inc. for NE 3rd/4t Street Corridor Study
(September 8, 2003)
Transportation Committee recommends Council approve a budget adjustment in the
Transportation Capital Improvement Fund (317) to transfer $19,800 from Project
Development and Pre -Design Program (2003) into this project.
cc: Connie Brundage
Keith Woolley
H:Trams/admin/committee report/2003/NE 34 Street Corridor Budget Adjustment
TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
September 22, 2003
APPROVED BY
CITY COUNCIL `
Bata
Berger/Abam Engineers, Inc. Contract for King County Portion of the
Duvall Avenue NE Widening Project
(Referred August 18, 2003)
The Transportation Committee recommends Council:
• Add this additional King County Duvall Avenue CIP project to the 2003
Transportation budget pursuant to the TIP.
• Approve a budget adjustment in Transportation Capital Improvement Fund (317) to
transfer $135,000 from Duvall Avenue.-NE/NE Sunset Boulevard to the City limits
project 2003 allocation into this project:, (The overall total 2003 appropriation will not
be revised.)
r.
• Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to enter„ into'tiie, proposed agreement with
Berger/ABAM for design :services for the Duvall Avenue' NE Widening Project in
unincorporated King County, ;
Don Persson, Chair
Toni Nelson, Vice-C
erri Bri re, Member
cc: Connie Brundage
Leslie Lahndt
James Wilhoit
}i:\Division.s\TRANSPOA.TAT\ADMIMCOMMREPO\2003\KC portion of Duvall Ave Widening.doc
TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT .
September 22, 2003
Project: Reallocation of Funds
Lake Washington Boulevard Slip Plane
(September 8, 2003)
4,7-7ROVED BY
`771 COUNCIL
®ate
Transportation Committee recommends Councilapprove the reallocation of funds in the
amount of $120,000 from the Transit Priority Signal System Program (2003-2008 TIP #6) to
the Lake Washington Boulevard Slip Plane project (2004-2009 TIP #52). It is further
recommended that the project be added to the list of projects requiring expenditures in 2003.
Don Persson, Chair
_ "7
cc: Connie Brundage
Jason Fritzler
H:Trans/admin/cwmmittee report/2003/LA WA Blvd Slip Plane Reallocation of Funds
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
AI #:
Submitting Data:
Dept/Div/Board..
Staff Contact......
AJLS/City Clerk
Bonnie Walton
Subject:
Bid opening on 9/11/03 — CAG-03-112
Maplewood Water Treatment Facility and Golf Course
Improvements
Exhibits:
Staff Recommendation
Bid Tabulation Sheet (six bids)
For Agenda of:
September 22, 2003
Agenda Status
Consent ..............
Public Hearing..
Correspondence..
Ordinance .............
Resolution............
Old Business........
New Business.......
Study Sessions......
Information.........
Recommended Action: Approvals:
Council concur Legal Dept.........
Finance Dept......
Other .............
Fiscal Impact:
Expenditure Required
Amount Budgeted
Total Project Budget
$10,644,448 (2003-2005)
$11,000,000 (2003-2005)
Construction only
$12,277,700 (2003-2005)
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
Project construction cost estimate: $ 10,671,956
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Transfer/Amendment
Revenue
Generated.........
City Share Total
In accordance with Council procedure, bids submitted at the subject bid opening met the
following three criteria: There was more than one bid, the low bid was within the project budget,
and there were no irregularities. Therefore, staff recommends acceptance of the low bid
submitted by Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc. in the total amount of $10,644,448.
X
C:\Documents and Settings\mpetersen\Local Settings\Temp\Agenda-Bill-award-of-contract.doc
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 15, 2003
TO: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
FROM: Abdoul Gafour, x7210
SUBJECT: Award of Construction Contract for Maplewood Water
Treatment Facility & Golf Course Improvements
On September 11, 2003, bids were opened and publicly read for the Maplewood Water Treatment
Facility & Golf Course Improvements. The City received six bids.
Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc., of Kirkland, WA submitted the lowest bid in the amount of
$10,644,448.00 for the construction of the facility. We checked the low bid and found no
irregularities in it. The engineer's estimate for this project is $10,671,956.99.
The Water Utility recommends that the contract be awarded to Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc. in
the total amount of $10,644,448.00. Due to the large size of this project, we will present an
informational briefing to the Utilities Committee on September 18, 2003.
The Water Utility's proposed budget for this multi -year, 2003-2005, project is $12,000,000,
which includes funds for construction, inspection, staff time and contingencies. A summary of
funding sources and estimated expenditures for this project is attached.
The Water Utility has sufficient funds in our 2003 Capital Improvements Project budget to cover
all work that will be done on this project in 2003.
Attached is a draft agenda bill with the budget information completed. Please use this
information to prepare your agenda bill for City Council with our recommendation to award the
contract to the low bidder Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc. for the Council Meeting on
September 22, 2003.
If you have any questions, please call me at x7210. Thank you for your assistance on this
contract.
Attachments: Bid Tabulation
Draft Agenda Bill
cc: Gregg Zimmerman
Lys Hornsby
Leslie Betlach
Nenita Ching
J.D. Wilson
C:\Documents and Settings\mpetersen\Local Settings\Temp\award-memo-to-clerk-Ol.doc
Maplewood Water Treatment Facility and Golf Course Improvements
Estimated Projects Expenditures (2003-2005)
Description
Amount
Construction contract
(from low bidder: Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc.)
$
10,644,448
Consultant Services for Services during Construction (estimated)
$
800,000
City staff for Contract Administration (estimated)
$
200,000
Contingencies (estimated)
$
613,252
Total estimated project costs
$
12,257,700
Project Funding Sources (2003-2005)
Water Utility Rates and Bonds (2003-2005)
$
6,685,000
Public Works Trust Fund Loan (2004-2005)
(subject to approval by State Legislature in 2004)
$
5,150,000
Parks Department Share for Golf Course Improvements (estimated)
$
422,700
Total Project
$
12,257,700
CADocuments and SettingsVnpetersen\Local Settings\Temp\award-memo-to-clerk-Ol.doc
:t Title:Maplewood Water Treatment and Golf Course Improvements
ATE: September 11, 2003- 2:30 p.m. PDT
n Unit Est.
Description Quantity
1
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Mobilization, Demobilization, and
Daily/Final Cleanup
0 1
2
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to Earthwork
0 1
3
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Over Excavation and Fill
0 6,000
4
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Shoring and Shoring Systems
0 1
5
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to Over Shoring
0 31600
6
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Import and Place Structural Backfill
Materials For Structures, Roadway and Yard
Areas
0 1
7
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Trenching Safety
0 1
8
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Yard Piping
0 1
9
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to Backwash and Chlorine Contact
Chamber Basins
0 1
10
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Building Construction
0 1
11a
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to GAC and Greensand Treatment
Systems Equipment
0 1
I 1 b
Supply all GAC media for the GAC Treatment
System
0 1
11c
Supply all Greensand, anthracite and filter gravel
media for the greensand Treatment System
0 1
12
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to Plant Process Piping and Mechanical
0 1
13
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Hypochlorite System
0 1
14
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Electrical, Instrumentation, and
Controls
0 1
15
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Surfacing
0 1
City of Renton
Engineers Estimate
Unit Bid
Price Amount
MidMountain Contractors, Inc. Skaar Construction, Inc Harbor Pack Contractors Pease & Sons, Inc
Unit Bid
Price Amount
725,000.00 725,000.00 480,000.00
958,300.00 958,300.00 1,000,000.00
11.85 71,100.00 10.00
1,094,800.00 1,094,800.00 750,000.00
48.61 174,996.00 10.00
40,800.00 40,800.00 375,000.00
25,000.00 25,000.00 25,000.00
1 557,000.00 557,000.00 650,000.00
(1,800,500.00 1,800,500.00 1,600,000.00
861,500.00 861,500.00 850,000.00
Unit Bid Unit Bid Unit Bid
Price Amount Price Amount Price Amount
480,000.00
600,000.00
600,000.00
100,000.00
100,000.00
821,216.00
821,216.00
1,000,000.00
800,000.00
800,000.00
1,503,400.00
1,503,400.00
1,417,078.00
1,417,078.00
60,000.00
20.00
120,000.00
12.00
72,000.00
20.00
120,000.00
750,000.00
1,000,000.00
1,000,000.00
1,030,200.00
1,030,200.00
907,874.00
907,874.00
36,000.00
10.00
36,000.00
4.00
14,400.00
10.75
38,700.00
375,000.00
400,000.00
400,000.00
583,000.00
583,000.00
515,868.00
515,868.00
25,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
650,000.00
1,100,000.00
1,100,000.00
682,000.00
682,000.00
836,200.00
836,200.00
1,600,000.00 1,200,000.00 1,200,000.00 1,235,000.00 1,235,000.00 1,035,303.00 1,035,303.00
850,000.00 1,170,500.00 1,170,500.00 1,258,390.00 1,258,390.00 1,023,710.00 1,023,710.00
441,200.00
441,200.00
550,000.00
550,000.00
600,000.00
600,000.00
451,380.00
451,380.00
405,659.00
405,659.00
268,300.00
268,300.00
170,000.00
170,000.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
178,000.00
178,000.00
155,402.00
155,402.00
32,500.00
32,500.00
42,000.00
42,000.00
1,000.00
1,000.00
42,200.00
42,200.00
53,975.00
53,975.00
770,800.00
770,800.00
1,400,000.00
1,400,000.00
1,200,000.00
1,200,000.00
1,020,000.00
1,020,000.00
1,298,000.00
1,298,000.00
121,100.00 121,100.00 140,000.00 140,000.00 45,000,00. 45,000.00 313,600.00 313,600.00 123,822.00 123,822.00
1,248,600.00 1,248,600.00 900,000.00 900,000.00 898,000.00 898,000.00 867,700.00 867,700.00 785,160.00 785,160.00
88,800.00 88,800.00 190,000.00 190,000.00 150,000.00 150,000.00 186,000.00 186,000.00 152,218.00 152,218.00
ect Title: Maplewood Water Treatment and Golf Course Improvements
DATE:
September 11, 2003- 2:30 p.m. PDT
:em
Unit Est.
to.
Description
Quantity
16
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Paving Overlay
0 2,700
17
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Golf Course Restoration and
Landscaping
0 1
18
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to New Irrigation System
0 1
19
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Netting System
0 1
20
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Traffic Control, Site Safety and Aquifer
Protection
0 1
21
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Interim Repair of Damaged Paved
Surfaces, as required
0 500
22
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Contractor Supplied Surveying
0 1
23
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to As -Built Drawings, Owner's Manuals
and Record Documents
0 1
City of Renton
Engineers Estimate
Unit Bid
Price Amount
MidMountain Contractors, Inc.
Unit Bid
Price Amount
4.44 11,988.00 15.00
85,800.00 85,800.00 35,000.00
7,000.00 7,000.00 25,000.00
288,000.00 288,000.00 250,000.00
Skaar Construction, Inc Harbor Pacific Contractors Pease & Sons, Inc
Unit Bid Unit Bid Unit Bid
Price Amount Price Amount Price Amount
40,500.00
15.00
40,500.00
13.00
35,100.00
6.17
16,659.(
35,000.00
35.000.00
35,000.00
35,800.00
35,800.00
33,838.00
33,838.(
25,000.00
25,000.00
25,000.00
24,900.00
24,900.00
23,522.00
23,522.(
250,000.00
200,000.00
,200,000.00
235,680.00
235,680.00
172,548.00
172,548.(
85,700.00 85,700.00 125,000.00 125,000.00 100,000.00 100,000,00 99,000.00 99,000.00 263,440.00 263,440.(
10.00 5,000.00 40.00 20,000.00 30.00 15,000.00 34.50 17,250.00 30.00 15,000.10
25,000.00 25,000.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 30,000.00 30,000.00 15,000.00 15,000.00 20,000.00 20,000.0
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.0
Subtotal
$9,808,784.00
Subtotal
$9,783,500.00
Subtotal
$9,797,000.00
Subtotal
$10,030,000.00
Subtotal
$10,265,192.0
Tax 8.8%
$863,172.99
Tax
$860,948.00
Tax
$862,136.00
Tax
$882,640.00
Tax
$903,336.9
Total
$10,671,956.99
Total
$10,644,448.00
Total
$10,659,136.00
Total
$10,912,640.00
Total
$11,168,528.9,
Project Title: Maplewood Water Treatment and Golf Course Improvements
BID DATE: September 11, 2003- 2:30 p.m. PDT
B Item Unit Est.
N No. Description Oue
Robison Construction, Inc James W. Fowler Co
Unit Bid Unit Bid
Price Amount Price Amount
1
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Mobilization, Demobilization, and
Daily/Final Cleanup
0
1
550,000.00
550,000.00
900,000.00
900,000.00
2
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Earthwork
0
1
755,000.00
755,000.00
823,300.00
823,300.00
3
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Over Excavation and Fill
0
6,000
75.00
450,000.00
12.50
75,000.00
4
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Shoring and Shoring Systems
0
1
1,100,000.00
1,100,000.00
948,600.00
948,600.00
5
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Over Shoring
0
3,600
10.75
38,700.00
11.00
39,600.00
6
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Import and Place Structural Backfill
Materials For Structures, Roadway and Yard
Areas
0
1
900,000.00
900,000.00
723,600.00
723,600.00
7
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Trenching Safety
0
1
1,000.00
1,000.00
29,100.00
29,100.00
8
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Yard Piping
0
1
850,000.00
850,000.00
624,300.00
624,300.00
9
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Backwash and Chlorine Contact
Chamber Basins
0
1
1,700,000.00
1,700,000.00
1,601,700.00
1,601,700.00
10
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Building Construction
0
1
1,250,000.00
1,250,000.00
2,290,100.00
2,290,100.00
11 a
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to GAC and Greensand Treatment
Systems Equipment
0
1
550.000.00
550,000.00
387,200.00
387,200.00
11 b
Supply all GAG media for the GAG Treatment
System
0
1
80,000.00
80,000.00
198,200.00
198,200.00
11c
Supply all Greensand, anthracite and fitter gravel
media for the greensand Treatment System
0
1
50,000.00
50,000.00
63,100.00
63,100.00
12
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Plant Process Piping and Mechanical
0
1
950,000.00
950,000.00
1,179,800.00
1,179,800.00
13
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Hypochlorite System
0
1
100,000.00
100,000.00
168,400.00
168,400.00
14
Perform all work as specked as shown herein
related to Electrical, Instrumentation, and
Controls
0
1
850,000.00
850,000.00
867,500.00
867,500.00
15
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Surfacing
0
1
180,000.00
180,000.00
185, 700.00
185,700.00
Project Title: Maplewood Water Treatment and Golf Course Improvements
BID DATE: September 11, 2003- 2:30 p.m. PDT
B Item
N No.
Description
Unit Est.
Quantity
16
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Paving Overlay
0 2,700
17
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Golf Course Restoration and
Landscaping
0 1
18
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to New Irrigation System
0 1
19
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Netting System
0 1
20
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Traffic Control, Site Safety and Aquifer
Protection
0 1
21
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Interim Repair of Damaged Paved
Surfaces, as required
0 500
22
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to Contractor Supplied Surveying
0 1
23
Perform all work as specified as shown herein
related to As -Built Drawings, Owner's Manuals
and Record Documents
0 1
Robison Construction, Inc
Unit Bid
Price Amount
7.50 20,250.00
James W. Fowler Co
Unit Bid
Price Amount
13.00 35,100.00
47,000.00
47,000.00
37,700.00
37,700.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
24,200.00
24,200.00
300,000.00
300,000.00
323,500.00
323,500.00
60,000.00
60,000.00
90,000.00
90,000.00
30.00
15,000.00
31.00
15,500.00
33,000.00
33,000.00
34,400.00
34,400.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
20,000.00
26,000.00
Subtotal
$10,869,950.00
Subtotal
$11,685,600.00
Tax
$956,555.60
Tax
$1,028,332.80
Total
$11,826.505.60
Total
$12,713,932.80
CITY OF RENTON.
BID TABULATION SHEET
'ROJECT: Maplewood Water Treatment & Golf Course Improvements; CAG-03-112
DATE: 9/11/2003
FORMS
BID
Proposal
BIDDER
Bid
Triple
Sub-
Includes 8.8% Sales Tax
Bond
Form
List
Addenda
Harbor Pacific Contractors
X
X
X
$10,912,640.00
19628 - 144th Ave. NE, Ste. A
Woodinville, WA 98072
Nicholas J. DeVitis
James W. Fowler Company
X
X
X
X
$12,713,932.80
PO Box 489
Dallas, OR 97338
Shelli K. Petersen
Mid -Mountain Contractors, Inc.
X
X
X
X
$10,644,448.00
PO Box 2909
Kirkland, WA 98083-2909
J.L. Levre
Pease & Sons, Inc.
X
X
X
$11,168,535.00
'O Box 44100
Tacoma, WA 98444
Darron C. Pease
Robison Construction, Inc.
X
X
X
$11,826,505.60
PO Box 1730
Sumner, WA 98390
Dennis L. Irick
Skaar Construction, Inc.
X
X
X
X
$10,659,136.00
PO Box 1558
Auburn, WA 98071-1558
Layne L. Skaar
ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
LEGEND: Forms:
Sub -List: Sub -contractor list
Triple Form: Non -Collusion Affidavit, Anti -Trust Claims, Minimum Wage
TOTAL:
$10,671,957.00
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
[A_17
F
Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works
For Agenda of: September 22, 2003
Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division
Staff Contact...... Carrie K. Olson x7235
Agenda Status
Consent .............. X
Public Hearing..
Subject:
Acceptance of additional right-of-way to comply with
Correspondence..
City of Renton code for new short plats.
Ordinance .............
Resolution........... .
Old Business........
New Business.......
Exhibits:
Deed of Dedication
Study Sessions......
Exhibit Map
Vicinity Map
Information.........
Administrative Short Plat Report & Decision
Recommended Action:
Approvals:
Council concur.
Legal Dept......... X
Finance Dept......
Other. ...
Fiscal Impact: N/A
Expenditure Required...
Transfer/Amendment.......
Amount Budgeted.......
Revenue Generated.........
Total Project Budget
City Share Total Project.
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The area to be dedicated for additional right-of-way
is a half cul-de-sac area of roadway known as
NW 3rd Court. The dedication is a City of Renton
code requirement of the Reservoir Short Plat,
LUA-01-169, and Council acceptance of said right-of-way should be completed prior to recording
deed with the short plat.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor
and City Clerk to execute the Deed of
Dedication.
I:\P1anReview\C0LS0N\Shortp1ats 2003\ReservoirSHPL 10 AGNBILL.doc
Return Address:
City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055-3232
DEED OF DEDICATION Property Tax Parcel Number: 182305-9248
Project File #: LUA-01-169-SBPL Street Intersection: 84th Avenue South and N.W. 3rd Court
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page _.
Grantor(s): Grantee(s):
1. American Heritage Homes, Inc. 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Abbreviated or full legal must go here. Additional legal on page
Portion of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East,
Willamette Meridian
The Grantor, for and in consideration of mutual benefits conveys, quit claims, dedicates and donates to the Grantee(s)
as named above, the above described real estate situated in the County of King, State of Washington. The dedication
is required as a condition for development of property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year as written below.
Approved and Accepted By:
Grantor(s): Grantee(s): City of Renton
i
Mayor
City Clerk
Form 84 0001 b/h
Page 1
6121.008.wpd
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year as written below.
Notary Seal must be within box CORPORATE FORM OFACKWOREEDGMENT
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS
COUNTY QF rJNG )
On of fi 2003, before me personally appeared
O to be ]mown to
be t of the corporation that executed
the within instrument, and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free and
voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said
instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation
Notary P611—ctm and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print)
My appointment expires: lei lb4
Dated: -<> 1nZ
Page 2
6121.003.wpd
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
N.W. 3RD COURT STREET DEDICATION
All that portion of the following described parcel:
The North 115 feet of the West 495 feet of the Northwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of
Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian, in the City of Renton, King
County, Washington;
EXCEPT the West 36.5 feet of the South 85 feet;
ALSO EXCEPT the West 30 feet of the North 30 feet;
Said portion being more particularly described as follows:
BEGINNING at the Southwest comer of said parcel;
THENCE North 01* 11' 56" East along the West line of said parcel 50.43 feet to a point of cusp with
a 15.00 foot radius curve to the left;
THENCE along the arc of said curve, passing through a central angle of 89* 43' 18", an arc
distance of 23.49 feet;
THENCE South 88* 31' 22" East, 205.64 feet to the beginning of a 19.50 foot radius curve to the
left;
THENCE along the arc of said curve, passing through a central angle of 38* 12' 48", an arc
distance of 13.01 feet to a point of reverse curvature with a 50.50 foot radius curve to the right;
THENCE along the arc of said curve, passing through a central angle of 128* 12' 48", an arc
distance of 113.01 feet to the South line of said parcel;
THENCE North 81* 31' 22" West along said South line, 314.20 feet to the Southwest comer of said
parcel and the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Project Name: N.W. 3rd Court Street Dedication
October 18, 2000
Revised November 13, 2002
Page 3
RW G/athrss
61211.002
G
Z Z
0 W
} Z
Q W
cc >
Q
S. 128th M 30' 30'
STREET a
n W' 30'
W 36.50'
N88'31'22"W 205.64'
to NW 3rd COURT
00 N88'31'22"W 314.20'
PROPOSED STREET DEDICATION
CURVE TABLE
LINE TABLE
CURVE
LENGTH
RADIUS
DELTA
LINE
LENGTH
BEARING
C1
23.49'
15.00'
8 '43'18"
L1
50.43'
SO1-11'56"E
C2
13.01'
19.50'
38' 1248"
C3
113.01'
50.50'
128'12'48"
N
VZ100,
File: P:\06000s\6121\survey\6121ex01.dwg Dote/Time: 08/28/2003 11:33 Scale: 1=100 pwalloce Xrefs:
Job Number
SRF
¢ �~ViQ
18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
11110.
6121
DrOe^
Q'
KENr, WA 98032
STREET
Page
RWG
Checked
_
(425)251-6222
(425)251-8782 FAX
DEDICATION
4 '4'
Date 10/18/00
NIC
��N �►°� ,
EXHIBIT
or
����_
MQ EN6*_ _ __
60TH AVE S 90TN'-- AV
9,
7
t
;n RCNroV
ay
------------
18215 72ND AVENUE SOUTH
KENT, WA 98032
(425) 251-6222
(425) 251-8782 FAX
CIVIL ENGINEERING, LAND PLANNING,
SURVEYING, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
RESERVOIR SHORT PLAT
NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP
AMERICAN HERITAGE HOMES
4840 SOUTH 152" STREET
TUKWILA, WA 98188
1" = 250'(APPROX) JOB NO. 6121
On
March 5, 2002
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
REPORT AND DECISION
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
SUMMARY OF REQUEST:
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT:
Ivana Halvorsen
Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc.
18215 72"d Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
Northeast corner of NW 3Td Court and 84`b Avenue South
Subdivide an approximately 1.21-acre property into 7 lots
suitable for single-family residential development
Development Services Recommendation: Approve with
conditions
The Development Services Report was received by the
Examiner on February 12, 2002.
PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining
available information on file with the application, field
checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
MINUTES
The following minutes are a summary of the February 19, 2002 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on tape
The hearing opened on Tuesday, February 19, 2002, at 9:01 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor
of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original
application, proof of posting, proof of publication and
other documentation pertinent to this request.
Exhibit No. 2: Preliminary Short Plat Plan
Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Utility and Grading Plan
Exhibit No. 4: Tree Retention Plan
Exhibit No. 5: Topography Map
Exhibit No. 6: Vicinity Map
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-0 I A 69,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 2
Exhibit No. 7:
Zoning Map
Exhibit No. 8: Yellow File from Original
Application, LUA-97-093,SHPL-H
Exhibit No. 9:
Cul-de-sac Illustration
Exhibit No. 10:
Overlay of Hammerhead Design
Exhibit No. 11:
Photo of T Court
Exhibit No. 12:
Photo taken from 12818 84
.Exhibit No. 13:
Photo of Downspouts at 12820 84
Exhibit No. 14:
Photo: Southside of NW 3` Court
Exhibit No. 15:
Photo: Road Height Differences
Exhibit No. 16:
Overlay of Seven Lots
Exhibit No. 17:
Sheet of Nine Photos
Exhibit No. 18:
Sketch of Cul-de-sac Half Street
The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Jason Jordan, Associate Planner, Development
Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The owner of record is Rob Kenyon
with American Heritage Homes. The zoning designation is Residential — 8 (R-8). The Comprehensive Land
Use Designation is Residential Single Family (RSF). The site is currently undeveloped; however, utility
construction is currently underway from a previous short plat approval. Immediately north, south and west of
the property is King County zoned R-6, to the east is residentially zoned R-8. The subject site is 1.21 acres.
The applicant has proposed to subdivide a 1.21-acre site into seven lots intended for the development of
detached single-family homes. Currently, the site is undeveloped with the exception of the construction and
infrastructure improvements currently underway. The original application was approved in November of 1997
and subsequently expired in September 1999. The land use approval for the division of property has expired but
construction permits were issued for the project with the previous short plat approval and work continues. The
construction permits have not expired. The ongoing construction impacts associated with this project have
created a very contentious atmosphere between the neighborhood and the developer.
No environmental review was conducted for this project, as there were no protected areas within the
development site.
The subject site is designated Residential Single Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map.
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the RSF designation in that it would provide for future
construction of single-family homes and promote goals of infill development. After the deduction of the new
half street improvement there is a density of 7.4 dwelling units per acre, which is in the five to eight range
established by the Comprehensive Plan. All lots meet minimum lot size, width, depth and setback requirements.
The subdivision proposes to provide access to the new seven lots via a half street improvement, which would be
NW 3`d Court, which extends from 84`h Avenue South and would terminate in a half street cul-de-sac at the end
of Proposed Lots 5 and 6. Staff recommends that access to Proposed Lot 1 not be allowed from 841h Avenue
South. The cul-de-sac turnaround is proposed to be located near Proposed Lots 5 and 6, which would provide
emergency access vehicular turnaround for the proposed development. Street improvements would include
lighting, curb, gutter and sidewalks on the north side of the proposed NW 3`d Court. In addition, lighting, curb,
gutter and sidewalks would also be required along the subject sites western boundary abutting 84`h Avenue
South.
The establishment of a Homeowner's Association or maintenance agreement for the development of onsite
stormwater and drainage facilities is recommended as a condition of short plat approval. In order to insure safe
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-I69,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 3
and efficient emergency access for the development staff recommends the applicant be required to place no
parking signs along the northern portion of the cul-de-sac turnaround.
The proposed subdivision is expected to generate additional traffic on the City's street system. In order to
mitigate these impacts staff recommends a Traffic Mitigation Fee.
The majority of the property is relatively flat and slopes at less than one percent. From the western boundary of
Proposed Lot 7 the property slopes in a northeast direction or approximately 19 percent from southwest to
northeast. These slopes do not qualify as protected slopes under the City's Critical Areas Ordinance.
The soil is suitable for supporting building loads; however, staff recommends the applicant comply with all the
recommendations contained within the geotechnical study dated December 13, 2001.
Temporary erosion and sediment control plans and the use of Best Management Practices are currently in place
and help to mitigate potential erosion and offsite sedimentation impacts. The project application includes a
construction mitigation plan, which was previously approved with the construction permits. The applicant has
met the minimum standards as approved per the construction plan.
The subject site is currently vacant. The surrounding area includes single-family residences developed within
King County and under King County zoning designations. The proposed lots are compatible with the existing
and newly created lots in the area. Staff feels that the proposal is consistent with both the Comprehensive Plan
and the Zoning Code and would not be out of character with existing or recent development in the area.
Adjacent property owners have addressed concerns over potential impacts from unauthorized use of their private
property located directly south of the development. They are also concerned with additional traffic on 84"'
Avenue South, stormwater runoff, and privacy from the proposed residences. In addition, the neighborhood has
indicated their growing frustration with the developer for the continued construction impacts associated with the
project. The neighborhood has also indicated a very strong desire to limit the number of homes proposed as part
of the development.
At this time City staff believes that the proposal meets the developmentstandards associated with the residential
R-8 zoning designation. The previous short plat was approved for seven lots and the infrastructure requirements
necessary for seven lots are being installed. Staff does not believe that any additional project conditions that
would limit the overall development size are warranted at this time.
Police and Fire Prevention staff have indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services for the proposed
development subject to a condition that the applicant provide code required improvements and fees.
The proposal does not provide any onsite recreation for future residents. There are existing recreation facilities
in the area which staff does believe would get an increase in use; therefore, staff recommends that the applicant
be required to pay a Parks Mitigation Fee.
The Renton School District has indicated that the schools in the area could accommodate the additional students
generated by this proposal.
There were no stormwater, water utility, or sewer utility comments at this time as the infrastructure is being
installed.
Staff recommends approval of the Reservoir Short Plat subject to conditions.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 4
Jack McCollough, 2025 1" Avenue, Suite 1130, Seattle, WA 98121 stated that he is representing Rob Kenyon
the applicant for this project. He stated that Mr. Kenyon would make a few comments then he would be speak
afterwards.
Rob Kenyon, American Heritage Homes, 1075 Bellevue Way NE, Suite 514, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that
after the initial approval there were some concerns regarding access that needed to be resolved prior to them
obtaining the construction permits. Once they obtained the construction permits there was a problem with Bryn
Mayr Water District and the City of Renton. They had to put an interlocal agreement together. The water line
that served the site was three feet higher then indicated on the maps so they had to get the water agreement
together in order to serve the neighbors to the south. During this process their short plat expired. They
continued to do the improvements to the site. Currently, they have asphalt, curb and utilities in and are very
close to being finished with those improvements. The site is now in the Renton Water District.
Mr. McCollough asked the Examiner to take notice of the previous short plat file for this project. The plat
complies with all subdivision zoning code requirements and the applicant concurs completely with the staff
report. The question at the center of focus in 1997 was the question of consistency with the Comprehensive
Plan at the time. An assertion was made that the proposal developed at a density of seven units would be
incompatible with existing development in the neighborhood and therefore might somehow be violating the
goals of the Comprehensive Plan. The City Council, a little over four years ago, determined that this was not
the case. This is in essence the same plan as before.
Patricia Wells, 8232 South 121 �`, Seattle, WA 98178 stated that the staff report states that the site is currently
undeveloped however, utility and construction permits are underway for the previous short plat approval that has
expired. She asked how the City of Renton could extend permits to continue to develop a short plat that has
expired. Once the process is in place and the drawings change how is the public informed of the changes.
She asked what the applicable code is for the half street improvement. She inquired as to how the street
standards section of the Renton Municipal Code applies to a half street improvement.
Ms. Wells asked how the turnaround is suitable for emergency vehicle access. She also requested the specifics
of where the no parking signage would be located near the cul-de-sac. She stated that she wants to ensure that
the developer works with the property owners to the south for the exact posting of the signage if it is needed for
no parking. She would also like to recommend that the applicant be required to place dead-end sign on the
northwest corner of the half street improvement.
She stated that the topographic maps do not represent what the land looks like currently. When they put in the
half street improvement there was much dirt that was pushed over to the east side. She supplied numerous
photos of how holes have been dug and water has collected.
Ms. Wells had questions on the access to Proposed Lot 6. The staff report claims that it will have direct access
to NE 3`d Court but according to the maps it looks as though it does not. It looks as if one must go off of the
public street onto the Proposed Lot 6. The access would be off of the private road.
Ms. Wells reported that staff recommends the applicant comply with all recommendations contained in the
geotech study dated December 13, 2001 and she would like to know more about the study and if addresses what
is currently being done with the mounds of dirt that are on the property. She has watched the mounds of dirt
from the road go over the hillside east and she displayed a photo of the mounds of dirt existing on the property.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 5
She stated that there are some markers on the private property south of Proposed Lot 5 at 12818 84"' Avenue
South. This is just one area where the developer has used private property without permission. They have
parked cars, made markers, ruined downspouts and there has been little or no explanation of these actions.
After the half street improvement was made, three of the four property owners on the south side went on Renton
water. The have supplied service to the second home in and have constructed a water main in the front, which
now due to the road, is about 12 inches down from where the soil is and will have to be moved up. She inquired
as to what is going to happen to the area that they dug up where there is a 12-inch difference. How will they
improve this area?
Kayren Kittrick, Development Services, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 asked for clarification
regarding Ms. Wells comment on the water main.
Ms. Wells replied she meant the water meter not main would have to be moved.
Ms. Wells asked whom the Homeowners' Association would pertain to.
The Examiner informed her that the residents on the south side would have to agree to be part of the
Homeowners' Association. The City does not have control over the current residents and the Homeowners'
Association would only pertain to the seven new lots.
Ms. Wells stated that under the recommendations in the preliminary short plat it states that temporary erosion
control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division for the
duration of the project. Ms. Wells asked who the representative is for the Development Services Division and
asked that the duration of the project be defined and also wanted to know why it is temporary.
She added that on the exhibits it is noted that there is a NW 4th Street. It is not a street, it may be a proposed
street but it is very deceiving. It shows that there is access to the easterly most lots when there is not access and
she feels that all exhibits should be corrected.
In addition, Exhibit 2 shows easement and restrictions so why are not all of the easements documented for this
short plat.
In regard to tree cutting and clearing, the plan notes that all trees will be removed from the site and to date the
tree retention plan to remove all vegetation has not been followed. With the work that has been done the trees
have been damaged and left to die. This has been difficult for a community that has expressed its concern about
saving the existing greenbelt and the environment. She believes that the applicant must stress to the community
how the tree retention will be followed and when replanting will occur.
Mr. Jordan stated that all the trees will be removed from the site and there are no plans to replant.
Ms. Wells stated that the topography map is from 1998 and the land has changed substantially since then. It
does not represent what the land currently looks like and asked why it had not been updated for the new short
plat.
Ms. Wells demonstrated on the overhead what the new development would look like and stated that there are no
lots of this size in the immediate area. She objects to the 35.5 foot half street improvement and stated that it
could have been so much better had the developer worked with the surrounding community. There was much
potential with this project to make it better.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 6
Jim Fenner, 402 Seneca Court NW, Renton, WA 98055 stated that he lives northeast of the property. His main
concern is the water runoff from the project. He had considerable muddy water come through his yard during
the winter. At one point it threatened to undermine his driveway and he was forced to dig trenches and build
dikes to avert the flow. They do not want this condition to continue when the project is complete. He displayed
photos taken at various times from his yard or near it. He fears that his driveway will be washed out and does
not want the problem to get any worse then it already is.
In regard to the new half street, he believes that the turn around is designed in a way that will encroach on
private property to the south. He then displayed a sketch of the cul-de-sac and stated that it should be moved to
the north to prevent the encroachment.
He stated that the dwelling size is incompatible with the surrounding area. Proposed Lot 7 is very large
compared to the others.
He inquired as to why the City is charging Traffic Mitigation Fees when all of the streets leading into the
development are King County roads, why is the County not charging fees. He also commented on the Parks
Mitigation Fees and the accessibility of parks in the area.
Patrick Yamamoto, 405 Seneca Court NW, Renton, WA 98055 stated that he lives next door to Mr. Fenner. He
is also concerned with water runoff from the project and potential future damage. There is a small greenbelt on
the northeast corner of the site that divides the properties, which slopes onto his and Mr. Fenner's properties.
Since this project has started they have had a tremendous amount of water runoff. It hits his foundation directly
and diverts east onto his neighbor's property. He feels that the greenbelt area is environmentally sensitive and is
concerned about future potential problems and who is liable.
Richard Wilson, 12816 84`h Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98178 stated that staff reported that the initial size of
the property is 1.21 acres. After the road is taken out it drops to .94 acre and they are still claiming it is one acre
of land for building. He asked why the density is taken from the original lot size. He asked where the sidewalks
would be located and is concerned that they take away from the size of the lots. He made several statements
regarding the size of the half cul-de-sac and illegal parking on his property. The area may be zoned R-8 but
most of the area has established residences that are on larger lots. When the road was put in they were promised
a 20-foot driveway to enter his property but this was not done. The developer has left a three-foot patch of dirt
between the two asphalt areas and he would like to see something done about this.
Mr. Wilson voiced a concern about parking and inquired if there would be parking along the street or would it
be marked with no parking signage.
He added that it would be a lot better use of the land if the developer scaled it down to at least six lots instead of
seven.
Debra Gregor, 12811 84`h Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98178 stated that because the piece of land is right next to
King County R-6 zoning, the R-8 zoning is not necessarily applicable as it might be if the plat were in the
middle of the City of Renton. In her opinion the density proposed is too significant. She feels that he additional
traffic from the plat, which will vent into her driveway, creates a potential danger to her and her family. She
reported that there were four very large cement braces that were uncovered as they were clearing the property
and she believes that those braces were originally intended for a water tower that had been planned at this
location 25 or 30 years ago. It appears as though they have been shoved onto someone else's property and it
would be too bad if they were left there and not removed. Another danger she has noticed is a light post on the
south side of the new road, it has been excavated all around the post and has been left open and unprotected for
many weeks and is full of mud and she would like to see this cleaned up.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 7
Richard Glad, 12812 84`h Avenue South, Seattle, WA 98178 stated that his concern had to do with access to the
eastern most property that is not developed. In the previous hearing he believes the Examiner required access to
the eastern most properties and this has not been done. The last information he received is that access beyond
the cul-de-sac would be by driveway. He is concerned about future development and how it will affect his
property.
The Examiner asked Mr. Jordan to explain what is located east of the proposed plat and where is the access to
it.
Mr. Jordan explained that the Thompson and Baker properties have access off of Stevens Avenue NW and there
is dedicated right-of-way for those properties.
Debra St, 14310 156`h Avenue SE, Renton, WA 98059 stated that her family owns the property at 12820
84a rogy,
Avenue South, which is directly south of Proposed Lots 1, 2 and part of 3. She displayed photos of the
entrance to the proposed plat. She would like to ensure that the intersection at NW 3`d and 84"' Avenue South is
finished.
Mr. Fenner stated that if the runoff water is the responsibility of the Homeowners' Association that means that
the contractor is not going to do anything and he and his neighbors would continue to have water running
through their yards.
Ms. Kittrick reported that the 1990 King County Surface Water Manual applies to this site. The developer was
allowed to continue work because their permits do not expire until March 27, 2002. The permits are extended as
long as work is continuing. There is no reason to prevent private homeowners from extending water or sewer as
needed. Bryn Mawr was the original water service district; however, the City through an interlocal agreement is
taking it over because it was actually the City's waterline and sewer in that area. All services have been
extended for the four existing residences as well as the proposed plat.
In regard to the construction of the half street improvement, half street is a misnomer. It is actually more then
half of a street in that it is 35 feet of construction, that is 28 feet of pavement as well as sidewalk, curb and
gutter. The sidewalk will be within the right-of-way. The easement shown is strictly an easement for the
franchise permits. The edge of the half street was supposed to match what was already in place and
unfortunately the contractor took out what existed. There has been much work in the past few months to get it
matched back to the driveways so that there is no height difference. The City requires that it match the existing
and be constructed so that it does not deteriorate.
Streetlights and sidewalks are still going in. The storm vault will be maintained by the Homeowners'
Association. The City Code allows the City to take over the maintenance but only after three years of
maintenance being performed by the Homeowners' Association. After three years they may apply to the City to
take it over. The topography map is fairly clear that there is a slope that goes down to the adjacent property.
Proposed Lot 7 is problematic in that is slopes down and away from the rest of the plat. The King County
Manual requires that something be done with roof runoffs and the City can require a conditions to take care of
the problem.
This property was originally City owned and was specifically set aside to build a City reservoir. It was
determined that a reservoir was not needed in this location and the property was sold.
The approved drawings for construction were approved September 21, 2000 and are only dead if they are
withdrawn and/or the permit dies. In this case the permit is still in use.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-0I-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 8
The Code for half street improvements is not governed by the Subdivision Code it is governed by Street and Fire
Code. The Fire Department has approved the half street improvements including the cul-de-sac.
If the meter box is 12 inches below City maintenance will need to be contacted because the water line has been
approved for use and has been tied into the City system. After this point the contractor is not allowed to touch
any of the services, City crews must adjust it.
Temporary erosion control is in place during construction until the permanent stormwater facilities are in place
to handle all the runoff.
The half street provides 28 feet of paving, 20 feet for fire and eight feet for parking on the north side. The cul-
de-sac will be marked with no parking for emergency vehicle purposes.
Mr. Jordan stated that staff has received a geotech report and one of the things that it states is that no earthwork
activities are to occur during the wet season. This may be why the mounds of dirt are still where they are. The
City of Renton does not recognize any established greenbelts in this area. With respect to the tree retention
plan, R-8 development standards do not require the applicant to replant.
Mr. McCullough stated that the two critical issues are street improvements and drainage
Hal Grubb, Barghausen Consulting Engineers, 18215 72°d Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032 stated that he
observed and assisted his design staff with the drainage and roadway design system on this project. The existing
condition on the site provided a split drainage basin. Proposed Lots 5, 6 and 7 as well as the bulk of the cul-de-
sac slope in an easterly direction. The proposed drainage control system provided the installation of a storm
detention water quality vault on the western portion of Proposed Lot 1. That system is sized to accommodate
the road improvements that are constructed within NE 3rd and Proposed Lots 1 through 6. Proposed Lot 7 will
have its own drainage system.
Mr. McCollough stated that he is not aware of cement blocks or braces on or near the site. With respect to the
south edge of the newly constructed street, the area is going to be hydroseeded and they are waiting to get the
requirements from the City to complete this process. The mounds of dirt on the site will be used as much as
possible on the site. Finally, he asked that the proposed short plat be approved.
Mr. Wilson added that most of the dirt was moved in the rainy months of November and December. He is
concerned that the new homes will be higher then the current homes and will cause water runoff problems.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and
no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 11:41 a.m.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & DECISION
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
1. The applicant, Ivana Halvorsen, for Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. filed a request for approval of a
seven -lot short plat.
2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 9
other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1.
3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, determined that the proposal
is exempt from an environmental assessment.
4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter.
5. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of NW 3rd Court and 84th Avenue South. The site is
west of the dead-end of NW 4th Street and west of Rainier Avenue in the vicinity of the Renton airport.
The subject site is on the boundary between the City of Renton and unincorporated King County.
6. The subject site is 1.21 acres or 52,920 square feet in area. The parcel is approximately 485 feet long (east
to west) by approximately 115 feet wide.
7. The parcel slopes gently for the majority of the subject site but then slopes approximately 19 percent at its
eastern edge. The slopes are steeper but are not steep enough to be considered protected slopes or sensitive
slopes.
8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 3132 enacted in May 1977.
9. The subject site is zoned R-8 (Single Family Residential; 8 dwelling units/acre). It received this
classification with the adoption of Ordinance 4404 enacted in June 1993.
10. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as
suitable for the development of single-family uses, but does not mandate such development without
consideration of other policies of the Plan.
11. A short plat, actually identical to the one reviewed here, was approved in November 1997 (File LUA-97-
093). That approval expired on September 9, 1999. Some difficulties delayed development and resulted in
the expiration of the plat without it being completed and recorded. At the same time, construction permits
had been issued to allow the installation of the former plat's infrastructure including the road and utilities.
The construction permits are not necessarily tied to the plat and have continued allowing construction
activity to also continue.
12. During the first review, the Hearing Examiner reduced the density of the plat based on what was perceived
as its incompatibility with its surroundings and that a plat with fewer lots still met both the Zoning Code
requirements and the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies. That decision was appealed to the City
Council. The Council reversed the Hearing Examiner decision and reinstated the original seven lots.
13. The neighbors argued that, again, the plat is not compatible with its surroundings and that the development
that has occurred up to now shows that flooding, drainage and impacts are excessive and that the density
should be reduced. This office feels compelled to abide by the earlier City Council decision and will not
review density again at this time. Neighbors may appeal this determination to the City Council.
14. The record reflects that drainage problems have occurred since the subject site was cleared. The temporary
erosion control measures have failed or been substandard permitting storm water to reach and damage
adjoining properties.
15. Staff has noted that the systems will be reevaluated to make sure that they are sized appropriately.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 10
16. Neighbors report that there is a rough transition between the edge of the new road or half road and the
adjacent properties. The transition is not smooth or gradual and has elevation differences of up to
approximately one foot. This creates problems for access to the adjacent properties.
17. There are also irregularities with some of the street improvements and utilities boxes and poles. Staff
indicated that they would investigate these facts.
18. The area around the subject site is developed primarily with single-family homes.
19. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into seven lots that will be developed in a tier directly
north of a half street, NW 3rd Court. The lots would range in size from 4,531 square feet to 11,328 square
feet.
20. Proposed Lot 1 is the westernmost lot and Proposed Lot 7 is the easternmost lot. Proposed Lot 7 would be
accessed by an easement to the new half street.
21. Staff noted that a half street is actually a misnomer in that it is substantially wider than a half right-of-way.
The street would be approximately 35 feet wide and include a half cul-de-sac at its eastern end.
22. The City has adopted a mitigation program that imposes fees based on a per unit charge. This fee is
generally imposed as part of the City's environmental review process and short plats are exempt from that
review. That does not mean that the development of additional housing will not have impacts on those
same services. The development of the subject site will have impacts on a variety of public services
including surrounding streets, emergency services and City parks.
23. The proposed density is approximately 7.4 units per acre, which is within the 5 to 8 units per acre required
by the City.
24. The proposal will generate approximately two to three school age children. They will be assigned to
schools on a space available basis in the Renton School District.
25. The proposal will generate approximately 67 vehicle trips per day.
26. Any dedication will have to be specifically directed to the City Council, as they do not accept short plats as
they do full plats with associated dedications of right-of-way.
27. The subject site is now served by City water and sewer.
28. The site drains in two general directions. Most of the plat (Proposed Lots 1 to 4) and land drains to the
west, while Lots 5, 6 and 7 due to slope, drain east. Drainage spilling from Lot 7 has flowed down slopes
affecting two neighboring properties. Staff reports that the systems for both flows meet City requirements
but during construction the temporary systems may not have performed well.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. The proposed short plat appears to serve the public use and interest. There are obviously problems
associated with developing the subject site. Some of those problems are not much different than
integrating any new development into a neighborhood and into a topographically constrained site. Some
problems were obviously uncovered since the plat infrastructure was installed and some may have involved
poor detail work. What is different in this case is that the real world issues with developing a short plat are
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 11
in evidence as this plat is being re -reviewed because while the plat lapsed, the installation of infrastructure
such as roads and utilities has continued. In this case, the expiration of the original short plat made a new
hearing necessary. The problems that developed while the site was cleared and infrastructure installed are
available as evidence. While these problems cannot and should not be ignored, that does not mean that
subdividing the subject site is inappropriate. It just means that additional oversight is necessary and that
may be an issue that warrants further scrutiny not only for this development but for many developments.
2. The plat will provide for additional lots for single family homes in an area that has appropriate utilities to
service urban development densities. Both water and sewer service can serve the site. It also provides
homes with very easy access to downtown Renton and its urban amenities.
3. Development and sale of the new homes will add to the tax base of the City. There is no doubt that the
new homes will change the character of the neighborhood somewhat. There will be additional traffic and
hubbub created by new residents. At the same time, those new residents will be living in single-family
homes like others in the community. The basic single-family character of the neighborhood will not
change substantially.
4. There appear to be issues, particularly storm water issues that were revealed by the clearing of the subject
site and the installation of infrastructure permitted by the previously approved but subsequently lapsed
short plat. Staff has provided oversight and has indicated that they will continue to do that as this site is
further developed when a new short plat is approved. It does appear that the interim measures were either
inadequate or poorly implemented. It appears that additional oversight is required. There were also some
questions about the adequacy of any final stormwater system. In order to assure that the further
development of the subject site does not harm or additionally harm adjacent properties it would appear that
additional storm water studies should be required.
The new homes will have an additional impact on the City's services. The mitigation fees that are
generally applied to new housing should be imposed on this proposal to offset what impacts there are on
the roads, parks and fire services.
6. The street improvements do not mesh appropriately with surrounding uses creating unsafe roadway edges
and probably maintenance issues in the future. These deficiencies will need to be fixed.
7. The applicant shall provide the City Council with the proposed dedication of right-of-way.
DECISION:
The short plat is approved subject to the following conditions:
1. The applicant shall place "No Parking" signage near the emergency vehicle cul-de-sac turnaround serving
the development. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the Development services
Division prior to recording of the short plat.
2. No direct access shall be allowed onto 84"' Avenue South from abutting lots.
3. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of
the short plat in order establish maintenance responsibilities associated with all on -site storm water and
drainage facilities. A draft of the document(s) shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development
Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the
recording of the short plat.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 12
4. Temporary erosion control shall be installed and maintained to the satisfaction of the representative of the
Development Services Division for the duration of the project.
The applicant shall pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee equal to $75.00 for each new daily
trip associated with the project for an estimated total of $5,024.25 (66.99 total trips x $75.00 = $5,024.25).
The Transportation Mitigation Fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the short plat.
6. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee equal to $488.00 per new single-family
residence for an estimated total of $3,416.00 (7 new lots x $488.00 = $3,416.00). The Fire Mitigation Fee
shall be paid prior to the recording of the short plat.
7. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee equal to $530.76 for each new single family
home for an estimated total of $3,715.32 (7 new lots x $530.76 = $3,715.32). The Parks Mitigation Fee
shall be paid prior to the recording of the short plat.
8. The applicant shall comply with all recommendations contained within the Geotechnical Report dated
December 12, 2001 prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc. with regard to site preparation, project construction
and design. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the
Development Services Division prior to issuance of building permits.
9. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the down slope perimeter of the area that is to be disturbed.
The silt fence shall be in place before clearing and grading is initiated, and shall be constructed in
conformance with the specifications presented in Section D.4.3.1 of the King County Surface Water
Design Manual, Appendix D. This will be required during the construction of both off -site and on -site
improvements as well as building construction.
10. The project contractor shall perform daily review and maintenance of all erosion and sedimentation control
measures at the site during the construction of both off -site and on -site improvements as well as building
construction.
11. Weekly reports on the status and condition of the erosion control plan with any recommendations of
change or revision to maintenance schedules or installation shall be submitted by the project Engineer of
record to the public works inspector for the preliminary plat construction. Certification of the installation,
maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required prior to recording of the
plat.
12. The applicant will have to submit supplemental storm drainage analysis that provides documentation that
the proposed system is adequate or upgrade the system to prevent storm water from causing property
damage downstream from the subject site.
13. The deficiencies in the edge of the new road and its interface with the existing easement and properties
abutting it shall be rectified subject to review and approval by the City. In addition, whatever edge
treatment is applied shall be such that it does not create future maintenance problems for the City or the
abutting property owners.
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-0 I - I 69,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 13
ORDERED THIS 5`h day of March, 2002.
FRED J. KAUF N
HEARING EXA INER
TRANSMITTED THIS 5`h day of March, 2002 to the parties of record:
Jason Jordan Ivana Halvorsen Rob Kenyon
1055 S Grady Way Barghausen Consulting Engineers, Inc. American Heritage Homes
Renton, WA 98055 18215 72"d Avenue South 1075 Bellevue Way NE, #514
Kent, WA 98032 Bellevue, WA 98004
Kayren Kittrick
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Jim & Carolyn Fenner
40Z Seneca Court NW
Renton, WA 98055
Richard Glad
12812 84`h Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Joseph Davis
12830 84`h Avenue South
Renton, WA 98178
Robert J. Nelson
12621 84`h Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Wilma Wells
12818 84`h Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
-Vicki Witters
9210 2"d Avenue NW
Seattle, WA 98117
Jack McCullough
2025 1 " Avenue, # 1130
Seattle, WA 98121
Patrick Yamaipoto
405 Seneca Court NW
Renton, WA 98055
Debra Story
14310 156`h Avenue SE
Renton, WA 98059
Virginia Odell-Eliason
350 Seneca Avenue NW
Renton, WA 98055
Deidre & Allen Skinner
12823 84`h Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Max Witters
3800 Brown Road
Ellensburg, WA 98926
Adalyn Gardner & Linda Daly
633 NE Bellview Court
Roseburg, OR 97470
TRANSMITTED THIS 5`h day of March, 2002 to the following:
Patricia Wells
8232 S. 121s`
Seattle, WA 98178
Richard Wilson Jr.
12816 80 Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Hal Grubb
Barghausen Consulting Engr.
18215 72"d Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032
Lester Beal
12828 840' Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Sharon Selden
1609 1450' Street South
Tacoma, WA 98444
James W. Ashley
78954 Quiet Springs Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92211
Debra Gregor
12811 84`h Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98178
Mayor Jesse Tanner I Gregg Zimmerman, Plan/Bldg/PW Admin.
Members, Renton Planning Commission Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Larry Rude, Fire Marshal Sue Carlson, Econ. Dev. Administrator
Reservoir Short Plat
File No.: LUA-01-169,SHPL-H
March 5, 2002
Page 14
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Transportation Systems Division
Utilities System Division
South County Journal
Larry Meckling, Building Official
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Director
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100G of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m., March 19, 2002. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may,
after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., March 19, 2002.
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You
may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur
concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in
private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both
the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
—rm�.rvs nm',mnln'n _
Y-3.
0
Ed
DENSITY CALCULATIONS
Ion UM1 a e[Ma a.sm wc[n
fOxwD M9GSnMM n-e
M. Moluiwx
m,w. lwD coup n.n K.
uLOwn[ OMLUn vwrf 1 LO)f
LOT AREA TABLE
lDt 1
x1G (Sf.)
Lot /
MG (Tf.l
�
i
olio
vlsl
wlal
fs.
f
i
.�f,.0
u
nA1w
sorb Im
xw nl,lsaw
sr.
Din K.
PRELMINARY SHORT PLAT
FOR
RESERVOIR SHORT PLAT
A PORTION OF THE NW 1/4 OF THE NW 1/4 OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 20 N, RANGE 5 E, W.M.
RENTON, WASHINGTON
N.W. 4TH ST.
e
Jar
Vc".taurt
_ a"c sw. wo.ssoeeo'
g
.ff
SURVEYOR'S NOTES
I.5 [ SC<Mx fVeOM1p1 !a MS Mtaw IS ebro w 1SE up CdMM1 KnVi fuMCr
tcmx suareaw a a[mpx la ronM,w n K M«a x.....
f. ufe a count esll mr a nGrtDll swan caxsea Mspw m v I. xtumeuam
a s arlru•. e[rM[n uM1 aesMas sa+n carton xuw[x srls
soPDOMnnf er swm c Doeea opro fst Ii ) svincKy rw n ww sfa.
�GlnwMn a ah a awox swnn caMlloL xDli,Mlrtilr xo.
)sb rtn.
.. uL mu Manwlpx fww w sln lw Iva e¢n snMcrro f11011 rnsr ulunx m�
xwlswuxcs mnrwr fscao susaesw Duwxltt xD. u»b-1 bnD aracn u. moo.
nKwc rrM wI, eMOWSM COrSNiwO MDw[[R wc. wt GS'wImI4 xp fn[P[wEM
mlf sswnM xal w e.wDxwrs, wxsD]is,s [xDwEsu. wc. )wrM a fwf ml[ rssas
wrtnfw M[ nascvto rnonuh Doan rw« swu slmw an IM xro wn olscsosm
M[ e[Me[K.[D rww xnmelun llmlrmtOx 011Sxrr[S[[. eMoxuSM [OMKrwO
FxaM[M, Sn. xK allro nxa1Y Ox flair urtnC.w'f WMf[MxTnni a rM mLL'[
w me s�Piwin[ MKa uc+�.wo'W°Dolws�n[uOl,rss erMmuusi a M swxc [xowtta. fsc.
a PnoMMr ev. . v.vD s sww[ r[n (Los : Ku:l.
a ws serer vml[� rK rmunrtrrt cmm�mlls tmrfc a Imneu Is.
n a u s. 7°JA9• wu escaum raw rles Pewecr w
). wi Dmsxtts .xE w rtR a.f. ssw.[r rtn).
a nes Is . mD rM.sxst sown. . salap rnI-f[cam Isfcrnax rorK sixipv eK
us[o so IIG.w][s art rxlGxxx -m alnwtt MurnxAfs e[nrtM nm coxuwwc
ywDMNprN� Sxowt 4pSMC Mips Of M[ rlVxtllS[ un On IXa(Dro rime[
)0-aa DK1wK[ MnsMwO tD:7xEM xw N[x rxleMiCO xi
w .. am wow oK )iw a rM wr[ a Mrs wnscY.
I � s suerxns' mnn �--
E7QSTINO LEQAL DESCRIPTION
r�rtnalt�l�f n0�x a K Mn bf I[fr a Mt wnsw[n Ouer[n a nn[ xaMMn
c a IOw610 f] xaM Mwt s VSi, eJr, w xfp Gkwh, IrxfwKraD
nttM na Mm u rn rtR a nm :ounl u rtn:
.rm IXem sM nni ]o rtn a rM xoxrx m rm.
EASEMENTS
F�AM���50�-2-2
r arGln n fwm ro rM sERM wp mrmnlDxt a . nao .sxD ulnm Mf[x[m
I. (��COIIDro wm[n n[coanD x0. SmSlfab. MGMDS a nwo CUwrf. nblSSnr01L
Mf rWPLSM1 6 fLOKR 10 M r[an wm Nr1U11016 K Swna w scam a fwMT
(SanoED seoGl ueonowm xa fwff]wu.
Mw W wtro MM)
F
0.
NOTE
1Mbf-Sib � v�
S IX6M1p OS[: fa0.0 !M¢r MSD[M[ � 'Cl�S1T]/
.. PIbIOS[0 NG) Lm sww[ font suSOm �
S [ w0 tawD: n•e (Mfpp014 0 W/KID
I. PnonOsro IOnSR. a-e (MSmtMW 1 W/KI
e. asmon snwCO�Oi[ r-u�i. ww aslrwmn.
s. PeofoMo wx. sot wmx: s.so'
ID. MOYoIro w. Lm npM fa E6 F N
II. rnoroMo uw. sm w.a [vl.sl s.r.
rf. fnOmm Opwm: )w W/K
rI. aDunro wx. eLaowc fRe,Ltf.
I.. sss] aa[ MwM a wlxowcs: u
b. sGasa a eouax) : mD slllrm[D ..o wer,so n
toll Doses sanu.m s,fevwc
Is. soutt a seroa..xr , raLo saM1xvro e,
rox Doses swsmwc wrrwc
11i1LMU/SERVICES
f(Mn/uiflD PIw110lMOMf aFl.
BOSS fbJM aMS uT
fMOx. a SOOff S',
Wf: A .11 1 so tMnm
fSa K a.
POSCT: nIORSspmO M(Sa � f k � t
I—Le1 1
b11e of 1
I( 001 111-
1[UMOx[: oM51 9 � W S A
aILLWC, nt �eoD1R00e l{t i
cbLc: .runs uwc[s
rofem°ew Y x,«
KeDM... secofw
fw[: Gh 0I Mxpx
Iwrtox. o feoss 4 � y
lama: mm�ox :oma asnnm � � d3
ears : ieo'sf < Sg P
anm
OWNER/DEVELOPER r x r =
xlfsnlryo xueKt lall[s. wc. _ �,,, � •(
ENQWFFo/PLANNER Jgoe e
eND1ew15M COMNnnO IxOM[M. M. _bf:
um sDe ns*Aa•
ro3U� mOR wmnc �`e`� j c �
mMfcn au rci �
s
VICINITY MAP 7�
)F NW4 OF NW4
KIN& COUNTY WASH.
N
K.C.A.S.
Mll iKM1
� 6M. • le,.i! �Flry 4 RWIW xelelluL DRNni
tM nFN ru tMse � uDRfxwEsr FceNaR or acrleN
' 10, llwxfNlR 1D NDgN, MNM i WT, w.M..
rawD i IroN
hI�1Y�u.i� i—
wwmw 1 nee 1
AN
ee' 1'Ds"w �\
Z.,
.............................:.. ..-....-.......-. H 8 SI .3 W
DESCRIPTION:
sl
........................-..... f 1 1 \ 1 \
4 \ \
............................... ....
1
SURVEYOR CERTIFICATE:
TKe IIDRrN ue Fiir or TNe NlJf M6 1¢T NDRTN,R®T
i flR11M tNRT tN15 nM IRMipo1TD A TDbMARXnIC' !W'<r
� quARna of tKe blmlwor gNpAru or lernow�ID tOwNLN a
/fiR'AAfeD fnftoe Mr mArenw IN JUNf,rtn, A c eiqum �
t
NMRN, MMK 6 q>T W.xLI IN WNO Couury, WAININ{•leu�IR
OF bM KWVd! OD Me1fIGN
NiRTRK MQ+Fe.
Ott T TN6 wptT fo pear WR AOAOi
' 6uI�CT � dAW Wr NIf Ieit1 AN Y M IxRrRa•dr
nu
�m f19<61- , /L6,
RLRONID fwrnY HmRr.lw o♦Itoe[<)
v.v��l
IVILL'r 1D ANNOtAn K Yo tlry o NNlOx ORp�t.Kt Mw/[R
I.�-1'
•�" .
/Evtt�'C'.`0 I�
lIDL RID•Rl 04 IN btNnr RptselNo N IeR'1 ,r0i/fD,•l,
v�
I'
AND
T1b/OIOl11 'lbllietNll
DDeDR, Wlt! A!l
;
�
rxe rear <.i rear w tNe lanes ei .eer w tKe
ISiS! luNMC1D III- !. A-H
1' 4'.•_
\ .\ .•.•-. f
R eri4.
evNxoeR rll
c..xi
{fD•Ive t{+•tinCAJ
:oo b1
1c•ulrz{e
RlvlffD hlo. tl (.r.D
Rfvl![D 111 ip l.[y
m1
�ii DA.jMf
SHEET 1 OF 1
CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL
Submitting Data: PBPW - Utility Systems Division
Dept/Div/Board.. Surface Water Utility
Staff Contact...... Ron Straka
Allen Quynn (X-7247)
Subject:
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Partnership
Agreement
Exhibits:
Issue Paper
Resolution
FEMA CTP Partnership Agreement
Mapping Activity Statement
AI #:
For Agenda of: 09/22/2003
Agenda Status
Consent ..............
Public Hearing..
Correspondence..
Ordinance .............
Resolution........... .
Old Business........
New Business.......
Study Sessions......
Information........ .
X
Recommended Action: Approvals: .
Council Concur Legal Dept......... X
Finance Dept......
Risk Management...
Fiscal Impact: None
Expenditure Required... None Transfer/Amendment.......
Amount Budgeted....... None Revenue Generated.........
Total Project Budget City Share Total Project..
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The Surface Water Utility requests Council approve the enclosed resolution authorizing the Mayor
and City Clerk to enter into an interlocal agreement with FEMA to complete a floodplain map
update of Springbrook Creek.
The purpose of the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Agreement is to formalize the
partnership between FEMA and the City. The agreement establishes the roles and responsibilities
and ensures each partner will commit the resources necessary to complete the floodplain map
update of Springbrook Creek.
The City's funding for the Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map update is budgeted in the
approved 2003 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program budget.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Surface Water Utility recommends the City Council approve the enclosed resolution
authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk sign the FEMA CTP Partnership Agreement.
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3061 Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update\1200
Agreements\agenda bill CTP Agreement. doc\AQ: tb
CITY OF RENTON
PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 15, 2003
TO: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Council President
Members of the Renton City Council
VIA: �,G Mayor Jesse Tanner
FROM: Gregg Zimmermal dministrator
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
STAFF CONTACT: Ron Straka, Supervisor (x-7248)
Allen Quynn, Project Manager (x-7247)
SUBJECT: Resolution Authorizing Mayor to Sign Federal
Emergency Management Agency Cooperating Technical
Partners Agreement for the Springbrook Creek
Floodplain Map Update
ISSUE:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department requests the City Council approve the
enclosed resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an interlocal
agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to complete a
floodplain map update of Springbrook Creek. The agreement is formally called the
Federal Emergency Management Agency Cooperating Technical Partners Partnership
Agreement (FEMA CTP Partnership Agreement).
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning/Building/Pubic Works Department requests the City Council approve the
enclosed resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to enter into an interlocal
agreement with the Federal Emergency Management Agency by signing the FEMA CTP
Partnership Agreement for the Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update.
BACKGROUND:
In February 2003, the Council approved a consultant contract with R.W. Beck, Inc. to
complete a floodplain map update for Springbrook Creek. The map update consists of
revising the existing hydrologic/hydraulic models that were developed as part of the
Eastside Green River Watershed Plan as well as updating the FEMA flood insurance rate
study and floodplain map.
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3061 Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map
Update\1200 Agreements\Mayor Agreement MEM0.doc\AQ1b
The City has been actively working with FEMA over the last year to ensure the hydraulic
and hydrologic modeling methodology that is being developed for the mapping update is
consistent with FEMA's requirements. A technical memorandum explaining the
modeling approach was submitted to FEMA last summer. FEMA's consultant Michael
Baker, Inc. reviewed the memorandum and concurred with the modeling methodology.
The CTP Partnership Agreement formalizes the partnership between FEMA and the City
as well as clarifies the roles and responsibilities of each partner as defined in the attached
Mapping Activity Statement. FEMA is responsible for reviewing and approving the
various submittals that are part of the floodplain map update process. These include the
hydrologic/hydraulic model, topographic base maps and final delineated floodplain maps,
and a technical workbook. The agreement obligates FEMA to allocate the resources
necessary to review products submitted by the City and its consultant. Once these
resources are committed, the City's map update will be given the highest priority for
expedient review and approval.
The agreement also stipulates who is required to complete the tasks necessary for the map
update and when, and what guidelines and specification(s) must be followed.
The City's funding for the Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map update is budgeted in the
approved 2003 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program budget.
CONCLUSION:
The Planning/Building/Public Works Department requests the City Council approve the
enclosed resolution authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the FEMA CTP
Partnership Agreement.
H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3061 Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map
Update\1200 Agreements\Mayor Agreement MEMO.doc\AQtb
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY (F.E.M.A.).
WHEREAS, F.E.M.A. is responsible for establishing flood plain maps; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to have the flood plain map updated for the Springbrook
Creek area; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to complete certain hydrologic and hydraulic modeling
preparatory to updating of the flood plain maps; and
WHEREAS, F.E.M.A. will review and approve the modeling methodology of flood plain
maps; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish the responsibilities, timing, and criteria to be
used in updating the flood plain map for Springbrook Creek;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects.
SECTION II. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into an
interlocal cooperative agreement with F.E.M.A. entitled "Federal Emergency Management
Agency Cooperating Technical Partnership Agreement."
1
RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2003.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2003.
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1006:8/27/03:ma
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
2
�yC1 Min,
w� p�'��� FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY
COOPERATING TECHNICAL PARTNERS
WPARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT
AGREEMENT is made on , 2003, by these parties: the City of Renton and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
BECAUSE the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) established by the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968 has several purposes, the most significant being
• To better indemnify individuals from losses through the availability of flood insurance;
• To reduce future flood damages through community floodplain management regulations; and
• To reduce costs for disaster assistance and flood control;
BECAUSE a critical component of the NFIP is the identification and mapping of the nation's
floodplains to create a broad -based awareness of flood hazards and to provide the data necessary
for community floodplain management programs and to actuarially rate flood insurance;
BECAUSE FEMA administers the NFIP and is authorized by § 1360 of the National Flood
Insurance Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4101), to establish and update flood -risk zone
data in floodplain areas;
Because, in the identification of floodprone areas, FEMA is authorized to consult with, receive
information from, and enter into agreements or other arrangements with the head of any State,
regional, or local agency;
BECAUSE FEMA encourages strong Federal, State, regional, and local partnerships for the
purposes of reducing flood losses and disaster assistance; FEMA and its State, regional, and loyal
partners have determined that it is advantageous to encourage and formalize greater cooperation
in the flood hazard identification and mapping processes; and many communities and the
agencies that serve them have developed considerable technical capabilities and resources that
provide the opportunity to improve and expand the collection, development, and evaluation of
flood hazard data; and
BECAUSE the City of Renton participates in the NFIP and been deemed by FEMA to be in
good standing in the NFIP; and
BECAUSE the City of Renton has expressed a desire to perform certain functions in the flood
hazard identification process and has provided evidence that it has sufficient technical capability
and will dedicate the resources necessary to perform those functions.
NOW THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed that the parties enter into this Agreement to work
together to create and maintain accurate, up-to-date flood hazard data for City of Renton subject
to the terms and conditions recited below.
CTP Partnership Agreement
City of Renton, Washington
1. CONSULTATIONS
The parties shall collaborate on flood hazard identification activities and shall consult with each
other to fully integrate each other's contributions into flood hazard identification efforts.
Questions regarding the execution of this Agreement will be resolved by an implementation
committee consisting of a FEMA representative and a City of Renton representative. In states
where statutory and/or regulatory requirements require State review and/or approval of new flood
hazard data, a State representative also will serve on the implementation committee as
appropriate. If the implementation committee is unable to resolve technical issues, the issues
may be resolved through alternative dispute resolution procedures.
2. EVALUATION AND REPORTING
The parties shall, on an annual basis, review the partnership created by this Agreement to
determine and document the activities undertaken to maintain accurate flood hazard data and to
revise the Agreement as necessary.
3. RESOURCE COMMITMENT
The parties agree to commit the appropriate and available human, technical, and financial
resources sufficient to coordinate effectively with all entities impacted by flood hazard
identification efforts to implement this Agreement.
4. STANDARDS
Unless otherwise agreed to by the parties, all flood hazard identification activities will be
accomplished in accordance with the standards documented in Guidelines and Specifications for
Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, dated February 2002, and all subsequent revisions.
5. SPECIFIC INITIATIVES OR PROJECTS
Specific initiatives or projects to be performed are documented in the Mapping Activity
Statement(s) attached to this Agreement. The parties will be obligated to perform as described in
the attached Mapping Activity Statement(s).
6. TERM
The respective duties, responsibilities, and commitments of the parties in this Agreement shall
begin on the date this Agreement is signed by the parties and may be periodically renewed,
revised, or terminated at the option of any of the parties. The parties agree that a 60-day notice
shall be given prior to the termination of this Agreement.
CTP Partnership Agreement
City of Renton, Washington
THEREFORE, each Mapping Partner has caused this Agreement to be executed by its duly
authorized representatives on the date this Agreement is signed.
Jesse Turner
Mayor
City of Renton
Date (Printed)
Mark Carey, Acting Director Date (Printed)
Flood Insurance and Mitigation Division
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region X
Dan Sokol Date (Printed)
Shorelands and Environmental Assistance Program
Washington State Department of Ecology
CTP Partnership Agreement
City of Renton, Washington
4��TlGY M9�9 �
City of Renton, Washington
a a Cooperating Technical Partners
Mapping Activity Statement
ro ob
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1— Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map
Production and Development of Updated Flood Data
In accordance with the Cooperating Technical Partners (CTP) Partnership Agreement dated ,
2003, between the City of Renton, King County, Washington, and the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), Mapping Activity Statement (MAS) No. I is as follows.
SECTION 1—OBJECTIVE AND SCOPE
The objective of the Flood Map Project documented in this MAS is to develop a revised Digital Flood
Insurance Rate Map (I)FIRM) and Flood Insurance Study (FIS) report for the City of Renton. The
revised DFIRM and FIS report will be produced in the FEMA Countywide Format.
In addition the Mapping Partners involved in this project will develop new and/or updated flood hazard
data for Springbrook Creek from SW 43rd Street to the Black River Pump Station, a reach of
approximately 3.43 miles.
This Flood Map Project will be completed by the following
• City of Renton;
• R.W. Beck, Inc., a contractor to the City of Renton for this Flood Map Project;
• Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC), a subcontractor to R.W. Beck for this Flood Map
Project; and
• Michael Baker Jr., Inc., the FEMA Flood Map Production Coordination Contractor (MCC) or
other FEMA contractor.
The activities for this Flood Map Project, including required Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)
reviews, and the Mapping Partners that will complete them are summarized in Table 1-1. The sections of
this MAS that follow Table 1-1 describe the specific activities, responsible Mapping Partner(s), FEMA
standards that must be met, and resultant map components. In Table 1-1, the City of Renton is identified
as "CTP." All activities that are to be accomplished by the City of Renton, R.W. Beck, NHC, or other
contractors to the City of Renton that might be selected at a later date are included in the "CTP" column.
Table 1-1. Summary of Project Activities
Activity 1 —Field Surveys and Reconnaissance I X
Activity 2 — Topographic Data Development I X
Activity 3 — Independent QA/QC Review of Topographic Data X
Activity 4 — Hydrologic Analyses X
Activity 5— Independent QA/QC Review of Hydrologic Analyses X
Activity 6 — Hydraulic Analyses X
Activity 7 — Independent QA/QC Review of Hydraulic Analyses X
Activity 8 — Floodplain Mapping (Detailed Riverine Analysis) X
Activity 9 — Independent QA/QC Review of Floodplain Mapping (Revised Areas) X
Activity 10 — Base Map Acquisition
Activity 11 — DFIRM Production (Non -Revised Areas)
X
X
Activity 12 — DFIRM Production (Merging Revised and Non -Revised I X
Information)
Activity 12A — DFIRM Production (Application of DFIRM Graphics and I X
Database Specifications)
Activity 13 — Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report Distribution
X
Activity 14 — Post -Preliminary Processing I X I X
Activity 1 - Field Surveys and Reconnaissance
Responsible Mapping Partner: City of Renton and R.W. Beck
Scope: To supplement any field reconnaissance conducted during the Project Scoping phase of this
project, R.W. Beck shall conduct a detailed field reconnaissance of Springbrook Creek to note any
change in roughness or additional hydraulic features that have been added since the current hydraulic
model was developed.
In addition to the initial field reconnaissance, R.W. Beck shall conduct a validation of cross sections that
were used in the model that were not "as -built." The validation will consist of comparing selected
modeled cross sections with surveyed cross sections. Up to six cross sections will be selected for survey
and comparison. It is assumed that no more than 3 days in the field for survey work is required. R.W.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 2
City of Renton, WA
Beck also shall coordinate with other Mapping Partners that are collecting topographic data under
Activity 2.
Standards: All work under Activity 1 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the Technical Support Data Notebook (TSDN) format described in
described in Appendix M of Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, R.W.
Beck or the City of Renton shall make the following products available to FEMA:
• Photographs documenting the current channel and bank roughness.
• List of information sources used for the Flood Map Project; and
• A memorandum discussing the validation results and recommendations.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fhm/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 2 - Topographic Data Development
Responsible Mapping Partner: City of Renton and R.W. Beck
Scope: The City of Renton and R.W. Beck shall provide topographic base mapping to be used to
delineate floodplain boundaries. Specifically, the City shall generate 2-foot-contour-interval topographic
mapping for Springbrook Creek using the existing digital mapping that was prepared in metric (0.5-meter
contour interval) and done in accordance with National Map Accuracy Standards. The City will convert
the existing to imperial units (2-foot contour). The topographic mapping and all other mapping for this
Flood Map Project shall be prepared using the North American Vertical Datum of 1988.
In addition, the City shall address concerns or questions regarding Activity 2 that are raised by the MCC
during the independent QA/QC review under Activity 3.
Standards: All work under Activity 2 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: Upon completion of topographic data collection and processing for Springbrook Creek, the
City shall submit these data to the MCC for an independent QA/QC review under Activity 3. In
accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the City of Renton shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• Hardcopy topographic maps;
• Report summarizing methodology and results;
• Mass points and breaklines data on CD-ROM;
• Digital work maps with contours;
• Checkpoint analyses to assess the accuracy of data, including Root Mean Square Error
calculations to support vertical accuracy;
• Identification of remote -sensing data voids and methods used to supplement data voids;
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 3
City of Renton, WA
• National Geodetic Survey data sheets for Network Control Points used to control remote- sensing
and ground surveys; and
• Metadata (description of the horizontal and vertical accuracy of the base map) compliant with
Federal Geographic Data Committee standards.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/thm/frm gsarn.pdf.
Activity 3 - Independent QA/QC Review of Topographic Data
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: The MCC shall review the mapping data generated by the City of Renton under Activity 2 to
ensure that these data are consistent with FEMA standards and standard engineering practice and are
sufficient to prepare the DFIRM.
Standards: All work under Activity 3 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the MCC shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• A Summary Report that describes the findings of the independent QA/QC review; and
• Recommendations to resolve any problems that are identified during the independent QA/QC
review.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/thm/fnn gsam.pdf.
Activity 4 — Hydrologic Analyses
Responsible Mapping Partner: Northwest Hydraulic Consultants (NHC) and City of Renton
Scope: NHC shall perform hydrologic analyses for approximately 25 square miles of drainage area for
Springbrook Creek. NHC shall calculate peak flood discharges for the 10-, 2-, and 1-percent-annual-
chance storm events using the HSPF hydrologic model and methods outlined in the technical
memorandum entitled "PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC
ANALYSIS OF LOWER SPRINGBROOK CREEK PURSUANT TO 2002 FLOODPLAIN RE -
MAPPING" (NHC, 2002), which was submitted and duly reviewed by the City of Renton; King County;
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District; FEMA; and the MCC. These flood discharges will be
the basis for subsequent hydraulic analyses under Activity 6. In addition, NHC and/or the City of Renton
shall address all concerns or questions regarding Activity 4 that are raised during the independent QA/QC
review performed by the MCC under Activity 5.
Standards: All work under Activity 4 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 4
City of Renton, WA
Deliverables: Upon completion of hydrologic modeling for Springbrook Creek, NHC or the City of
Renton shall submit the results to the MCC for an independent QA/QC review under Activity 5. In
accordance with the TSDN format described in Appendix M of Guidelines and Specifications for Flood
Hazard Mapping Partners, NHC or the City of Renton shall make the following products available to
FEMA:
• Digital copies of all hydrologic modeling (input and output) files for the 10-, 2-, and I -percent -
annual -chance storm events;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of the Summary of Discharges Table presenting discharge data for
the flooding sources for which hydrologic analyses were performed;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of a memorandum documenting the hydrologic analysis for
Springbrook Creek that is sufficient to meet the requirements for Section 3.1 of the FIS report as
documented in Appendix J, Subsection J.1.3 of Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard
Mapping Partners; and
• Digital and hardcopy versions of all relevant backup data used in the analysis, including work
maps.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/tbm/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 5 - Independent QA/QC Review of Hydrologic Analyses
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: The MCC shall review the technical, scientific, and other information submitted by NHC or the
City of Renton under Activity 4 to ensure that the data and modeling are consistent with FEMA standards
and standard engineering practice and are sufficient to prepare the DFIRM. This work shall include, at a
minimum, the activities listed below.
• Review the submittal for technical and regulatory adequacy, completeness of required
information, and supporting data and documentation. The technical review is to focus on the
following:
- Use of acceptable models;
- Use of appropriate methodology(ies);
- Correctly applied methodology(ies)/model(s), including QC of input parameters;
- Comparison with gage data and/or regression equations, if appropriate; and
- Comparison with discharges for contiguous reaches or flooding sources.
• Maintain records of all contacts, reviews, recommendations, and actions and make them readily
available to FEMA.
• Maintain an archive of all data submitted for hydrologic modeling review. (All supporting data
must be retained for 3 years from the date funding recipient submits its final expenditure report to
FEMA.)
Standards: All work under Activity 5 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1
City of Renton, WA
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the MCC shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• A Summary Report that describes the findings of the independent QA/QC review; and
• Recommendations to resolve any problems that are identified during the independent QA/QC
review.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema..,og_v/pdf/thm/frm sg am.pdf.
Activity 6 — Hydraulic Analyses
Responsible Mapping Partner: R.W. Beck, NHC, and City of Renton
Scope: R.W. Beck shall perform hydraulic analyses for approximately 3.43 miles of Springbrook Creek.
The modeling will include the 10-, 2-, and 1-percent-annual-chance events based on peak discharges
computed under Activity 4. The hydraulic methods used for this analysis will include the FEQ model.
R.W. Beck shall use the existing FEQ model updated with any changes defined in Activity 1 to perform
the hydraulic analyses. The analysis approach will generally follow the approach outlined in the technical
memorandum entitled "PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR HYDROLOGIC AND HYDRAULIC
ANALYSIS OF LOWER SPRINGBROOK CREEK PURSUANT TO 2002 FLOODPLAIN RE -
MAPPING" (NHC, 2002). The hydraulic analyses will be used to establish flood elevations and a
regulatory floodway for Springbrook Creek. Also, R.W. Beck and/or the City of Renton shall address all
concerns or questions regarding Activity 6 that are raised by the MCC during the independent QA/QC
review under Activity 7.
Standards: All work under Activity 6 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: Upon completion of hydraulic modeling for Springbrook Creek, R.W. Beck or the City of
Renton shall submit the results to the MCC for an independent QA/QC review under Activity 7. In
accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, R.W. Beck or the City of Renton shall make the
following products available to FEMA:
• Digital profiles of the 10-, 2-, and 1-percent-annual-chance water -surface elevations representing
existing conditions using the FEMA RASPLOT program or similar software;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of the Floodway Data Table for each flooding source that is
compatible with the DFIRM database;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of all hydraulic modeling (input and output) files;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of table with range of Manning's "n" values;
• Digital and hardcopy versions of all relevant backup data used in the analyses; and
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 6
City of Renton, WA
• Digital and hardcopy versions of a memorandum documenting the hydraulic analysis for
Springbrook Creek that is sufficient to meet the requirements for Section 3.2 of the FIS report as
documented in Appendix J, Subsection J.1.3 of Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard
Mapping Partners.
These Activity 6 deliverables will be submitted along with the deliverables for Activity 8.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fhm/frm asam.pdf.
Activity 7 - Independent QA/QC Review of Hydraulic Analyses
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: The MCC shall review the technical, scientific, and other information submitted by R.W. Beck or
the City of Renton under Activity 6 to ensure that the data and modeling are consistent with FEMA
standards and standard engineering practice and are sufficient to revise the FIRM. This work shall
include, at a minimum, the activities listed below.
• Review the submittal for technical and regulatory adequacy, completeness of required
information, and supporting data and documentation. The technical review is to focus on the
following:
- Use of acceptable model(s);
- Starting water -surface elevations;
- Cross-section geometry;
- Manning's "n" values and expansion/contraction coefficients;
- Bridge and culvert modeling;
- Flood discharges;
- Regulatory floodway computation methods; and
• Tie-in to upstream and downstream non -revised Flood Profiles
• Maintain records of all contacts, reviews, recommendations, and actions and make them readily
available to FEMA.
• Maintain an archive of all data submitted for hydraulic modeling review. (All supporting data
must be retained for 3 years from the date funding recipient submits its final expenditure report to
FEMA.)
Standards: All work under Activity 7 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the MCC shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• A Summary Report that describes the findings of the independent QA/QC review; and
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 7
City of Renton, WA
• Recommendations to resolve any problems that are identified during the independent QA/QC
review.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fhm/frm gsam•pdf.
Activity 8 - Floodplain Mapping (Detailed Riverine Analysis)
Responsible Mapping Partner: R.W. Beck, NHC, and City of Renton
Scope: R.W. Beck shall delineate the 1-percent-annual-chance floodplain boundaries and the regulatory
floodway boundaries for Springbrook Creek. R.W. Beck shall incorporate all new or revised hydrologic
and hydraulic analyses and shall use the topographic data acquired under Activity 2 to delineate the
floodplain and regulatory floodway boundaries on a digital work map. In addition, R.W. Beck shall
incorporate the results of all effective Letters of Map Change (LOMCs) within the revised areas as
appropriate. Upon completion of the floodplain mapping, R.W. Beck shall submit the floodplain mapping
to NHC for an independent QA/QC review for consistency with FEMA mapping (formatting) standards
before the mapping is submitted to the MCC for an independent QA/QC review under Activity 9. Also,
R.W. Beck or the City of Renton shall address all concerns or questions regarding Activity 8 that are
raised by the MCC during the independent QA/QC review under Activity 9.
Standards: All work under Activity 8 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: Upon completion of the floodplain mapping, R.W. Beck or the City of Renton shall submit
the results to the MCC for an independent QA/QC review under Activity 9. In accordance with the
TSDN format described in Appendix M of Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping
Partners, R.W. Beck or the City of Renton shall make the following products available to FEMA:
• Digital, Computer -Assisted Drafting (CAD) -generated work maps showing the 1- percent -annual -
chance floodplain boundary delineations, regulatory floodway boundary delineations, cross
sections, BFEs, flood insurance risk zone labels, and all applicable base map features;
• Draft updates to existing DFIRM mapping for King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas
by providing an updated portion for Springbrook Creek (in NAVD88 datum), prepared in
accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping
Partners;
• Updates to existing metadata files describing the DFIRM data for King County, Washington and
Incorporated Areas, including all required information shown in Guidelines and Specifications for
Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Complete set of plots of CAD -generated work maps showing all detailed flood hazard
information at a suitable scale;
• A Summary Report that describes and provides the results of all automated or manual QA/QC
review steps taken during the preparation of the CAD -generated work maps;
• Any backup or supplemental information used in the mapping required for the independent
QA/QC review outlined under Activity 9; and
• An explanation for the use of existing topography for the studied reaches, if appropriate.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 8
City of Renton, WA
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/flim/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 9 - Independent QA/QC Review of Floodplain Mapping (Revised Areas)
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: The MCC shall review the floodplain mapping submitted by R.W. Beck or the City of Renton
under Activity 8 to ensure that the results of the analyses performed are accurately represented, the work
maps are consistent with current FEMA standards, and the work maps are sufficient to prepare the
DFIRM. This work shall include, at a minimum, the activities listed below.
• Review the cross sections for proper location and orientation on the work map and agreement
with the Floodway Data Table.
• Review the BFEs shown on the work maps for proper location and agreement with the results of
the hydraulic modeling.
• Review the regulatory Foodway widths shown on the work maps for agreement with the widths
shown in the Floodway Data Table and the results of the hydraulic modeling.
• Review the floodplain boundaries shown on the work maps for agreement with the flood
elevations shown in the Floodway Data Table and the contour lines and other topographic
information shown on the work maps.
• Review the floodplain widths at cross sections as shown on the work maps to ensure they match
the Floodway Data Table.
• Review the floodplain boundaries as shown on the work maps to ensure they match the Flood
Profiles.
• Review the flood insurance risk zones as shown on the work maps to ensure they are labeled
properly.
• Review the DFIRM mapping files to ensure they were prepared in accordance with the
requirements in Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners.
• Review the metadata files to ensure they include all required information shown in Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners.
Standards: All work under Activity 9 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the MCC shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• A Summary Report that describes the findings of the QA/QC review, noting any deficiencies in
or agreeing with the mapping results;
• Recommendations to resolve any problems that are identified during the independent QA/QC
review; and
• An annotated work map with all questions and/or concerns indicated, if necessary.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 g
City of Renton, WA
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fbm/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 10 - Base Map Acquisition
Responsible Mapping Partner: City of Renton and R.W. Beck
Scope: The City of Renton and R.W. Beck shall provide the digital base map. The required activities are
as follows:
• Obtain digital files (raster or vector) of the base map.
• Secure necessary permissions from the map source to allow FEMA's use and distribution of
hardcopy and digital map products using the digital base map, free of charge.
• Certify that the digital data meet the minimum standards and specifications that FEMA requires
for DFIRM production.
• Populate the DFIRM database with the information required by FEMA.
Standards: All work under Activity 10 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the City of Renton shall make the following
products available to FEMA:
• Written certification that the digital data meet the minimum standards and specifications;
• Documentation that FEMA can use the digital base map; and
• Digital work map (submitted under Activity 8).
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fbm/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 11 — DFIRM Production (Non -Revised Areas)
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: For all flooding sources except the segment of Springbrook Creek for which updated flood data
will be developed under Activities 1 through 8, the MCC shall convert the information shown on the
effective DFIRM for King County, Washington and Incorporated Areas, as appropriate, in accordance
with FEMA DFIRM specifications. The MCC shall use the base map acquired under Activity 10 for the
conversion. The scope of Activity 11 covers the revision of 3 DFIRM panels. The MCC also shall
ensure that the results of LOMCs issued by FEMA since the date of the current effective DFIRM panels
have been incorporated properly for flooding sources other than Springbrook Creek.
Standards: All work under Activity 11 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 10
City of Renton, WA
• Digital work maps showing the 1--percent-annual-chance floodplain boundary delineations,
regulatory floodway boundary delineations, cross sections, BFEs, flood insurance risk zone
labels, and all applicable base map features;
• DFIRM mapping files, prepared in accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Metadata files describing the DFIRM data, including all required information shown in
Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Complete set of plots of DFIRM panels showing all detailed flood hazard information at a
suitable scale; and
• A Summary Report that describes and provides the results of all automated or manual QA/QC
review steps taken during the preparation of the DFIRM, including a check that the road and
floodplain relationship is maintained for all non -revised areas.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fbm/frm gsam.pdf.
Activity 12 —DFIRM Production (Merging Revised and Non -Revised Information)
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scone: Upon completion of the floodplain mapping activities for the revised flooding source (Activity 8)
and the DFIRM production for non -revised areas (Activity 11), the MCC shall merge the digital
floodplain data into a single, updated DFIRM. This work is to include tie-in of flood hazard information
for areas that were not studied as part of the Flood Map Project documented in this MAS. The MCC also
shall tie in the revised and non -revised Flood Profiles, floodplain boundaries, and regulatory floodway
boundaries with contiguous communities that were not studied as part of the Flood Map Project
documented in this MAS.
Standards: All work under Activity 12 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, R.W. Beck or the City of Renton shall make the
following products available to FEMA:
• Digital work maps showing the 1- and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain boundary
delineations, regulatory floodway boundary delineations, cross sections, BFEs, flood insurance
risk zone labels, and all applicable base map features;
• DFIRM mapping files, prepared in accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Metadata files describing the DFIRM data, including all required information shown in
Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Complete set of plots of DFIRM panels showing all detailed flood hazard information at a
suitable scale; and
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 11
City of Renton, WA
• A Summary Report that describes and provides the results of all automated or manual QA/QC
review steps taken during the preparation of the DFIRM.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fbm/frm gsam.pdf
Activity 12A — DFIRM Production (Application of DFIRM Graphics
and Database Specifications)
Responsible Mapping Partner: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: The MCC shall apply the final FEMA DFIRM graphic and database specifications to the DFIRM
files produced under Activity 12. This work shall include adding all required annotation, line pattern,
area shading, and map collar information (e.g., map borders, title blocks, legends, notes to user). The
MCC shall coordinate with those Mapping Partners responsible for Activities 8, 11, and 12, as necessary,
to resolve any problems that are identified during Activity 12A.
Standards: All work under Activity 12A shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, the MCC shall make the following products
available to FEMA:
• Digital work maps showing the 1- and 0.2-percent-annual-chance floodplain boundary
delineations, regulatory floodway boundary delineations, cross sections, BFEs, flood insurance
risk zone labels, and all applicable base map features;
• DFIRM mapping files, prepared in accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners•,
• Metadata files describing the DFIRM data, including all required information shown in
Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners;
• Complete set of plots of DFIRM panels showing all detailed flood hazard information at a
suitable scale; and
• A Summary Report that describes and provides the results of all automated or manual QA/QC
review steps taken during the preparation of the DFIRM.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.feina.gov/pdf/fhm/fnn gsam.pdf.
Activity 13 - Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report Distribution
Responsible Mapping Partners: FEMA (MCC)
Scope: Activity 13 consists of the final preparation, review, and distribution of the Preliminary copies of
the DFIRM and FIS report for community official and general public review and comment. The activities
to be performed are summarized below.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 12
City of Renton, WA
Preliminary Transmittal Letter Preparation. The MCC shall prepare letters to transmit the Preliminary
copies of the DFIRM and FIS report and related enclosures to all affected communities, all other Project
Team members, the State NFIP Coordinator, the FEMA Regional Office, and others as directed by
FEMA.
Final QAIQC Review of Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report: The MCC shall perform a final QA/QC
review of the Preliminary DFIRM and FIS report, including all data tables, Flood Profiles, and other
components of the FIS report. The QA/QC review procedures shall be consistent with the Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners.
Discrepancy Resolution: The MCC shall work with City of Renton, R.W. Beck, NHC, and FEMA as
appropriate to resolve discrepancies identified during the final QA/QC review.
Distribution of Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report: The MCC shall distribute the Preliminary copies of
the DFIRM and FIS report to all affected communities, all other Project Team members, the State NFIP
Coordinator, the FEMA Regional Office, and others as directed by FEMA.
News Release Preparation: The MCC shall prepare news release notifications of BFE changes for all
affected communities if appropriate and perform QA/QC reviews of the notifications for accuracy and
compliance with FEMA format requirements. The MCC shall file the notifications for later submittal to
FEMA for review.
Preliminary Summary of Map Actions (SOMA) Preparation: The MCC shall prepare Preliminary
SOMAs for all affected communities if appropriate. The SOMA shall list pertinent information regarding
LOMCs that will be affected by the issuance of the DFIRM (i.e., superseded, incorporated, revalidated).
Standards: All work under Activity 13 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners and the requirements documented in Section 1
and Appendix A of the FEMA Document Control Procedures Manual, the MCC shall make the products
listed below available to FEMA.
• Preliminary transmittal letters shall be prepared. These letters and any additional letters requested
by FEMA shall be prepared in accordance with the current version of the FEMA Document
Control Procedures Manual.
• Preliminary copies of the DFIRM and FIS report, including all updated data tables and Flood
Profiles shall be mailed to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and floodplain administrator of
each affected community, all other Project Team members, the State NFIP Coordinator, the
FEMA Regional Office, and others as directed by FEMA.
• Preliminary SOMAs, prepared in accordance with FEMA requirements, shall be mailed with the
Preliminary copies of the DFIRM and FIS report when appropriate.
• Revised DFIRM mapping files, prepared in accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, shall be provided on CD-ROM.
• Revised DFIRM database files, prepared in accordance with the requirements in Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, shall be provided on CD-ROM.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 13
City of Renton, WA
Revised metadata files describing the DFIRM data, including all required information shown in
Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners, shall be provided on
CD-ROM.
• A Summary Report that describes and provides the results of all automated or manual QA/QC
review steps taken during the preparation of the DFIRM shall be provided.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fhm/fnn sg am.pdf.
Activity 14 - Post -Preliminary Processing
Responsible Mapping Partners: FEMA (MCC) and City of Renton
Scope: Activity 14 consists of finalizing the DFIRM and FIS report after the Preliminary copies of the
DFIRM and FIS report have been issued to community officials and the public for review and comment.
The activities to be performed are summarized below.
Initiation of Statutory 90-Day Appeal Period: When required, upon completion of a 30-day community
comment period and/or final coordination meeting with the affected communities, the MCC and City of
Renton shall arrange for and verify that the following activities are completed in accordance with the
current version of the FEMA Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners and
Document Control Procedures Manual:
• Proposed BFE determination letters are sent to the community CEOs and floodplain
administrators.
• News release notifications of BFE changes are published in prominent newspapers with local
circulation.
• The appropriate notices (Proposed Rules) are published in the Federal Register.
Resolution of Appeals and Protests: The MCC and the City of Renton shall support FEMA in reviewing
and resolving appeals and protests received during the 90-day appeal period. For each appeal and protest,
the following activities shall be conducted as appropriate:
• Initial processing and acknowledgment of submittal;
• Technical review of submittal;
• Preparation of letter(s) requesting additional supporting data;
• Performance of revised analyses; and
• Preparation of a draft resolution letter and revised DFIRM and FIS report materials for FEMA
review.
The MCC shall mail all associated correspondence upon authorization by FEMA.
Preparation of Special Correspondence: The MCC and the City of Renton shall support FEMA in
responding to comments not received within the 90-day appeal period (referred to as "special
correspondence"), including drafting responses for FEMA review when appropriate and finalizing
responses when requested by FEMA. The MCC also shall mail the final correspondence (and enclosures
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 14
City of Renton, WA
if appropriate) and distribute appropriate copies of the correspondence and enclosures upon receipt of
authorization from FEMA.
Revision of DFIRM and FIS Report: If necessary, the MCC and the City of Renton shall work together to
revise the DFIRM and FIS report at the direction of the FEMA Regional Project Officer and distribute
Revised Preliminary copies of the DFIRM and FIS report to the CEO and floodplain administrator of
each affected community, all other Project Team members, the State NFIP Coordinator, the FEMA
Regional Office, and others as directed by FEMA.
Final SOMA Preparation: The MCC shall prepare Final SOMAS for the affected communities as
appropriate.
Processing of Letter of Final Determination: The MCC and the City of Renton shall work with FEMA to
establish the effective date for the DFIRM and FIS report, and shall prepare a Letter of Final
Determination (LFDs) for each affected community for FEMA review in accordance with the FEMA
Document Control Procedures Manual. The MCC also shall mail the final signed LFDs and enclosures
and distribute appropriate copies of the signed LFDs and enclosures (including the Final SOMA and the
Final Rule for publication in the Federal Register, when appropriate) upon receipt of authorization from
FEMA.
Processing of Final DFIRM and FIS Report for Printing: The MCC shall prepare final reproduction
materials for the DFIRM and FIS report and provide these materials to the FEMA Map Service Center for
printing by the U.S. Government Printing Office: The MCC also shall prepare the appropriate paperwork
to accompany the DFIRM and FIS report (including Print Processing Worksheet, Printing Requisition
Forms, and Community Map Actions Form) and transmittal letters to the community CEOs.
Revalidation Letter Processing. The MCC shall prepare and distribute letters to the community CEOs
and floodplain administrators to notify the affected communities about LOMCs for which determinations
will remain in effect after the DFIRM and FIS report become effective.
Archiving Data: The MCC shall ensure that technical and administrative support data are packaged in the
FEMA-required TSDN format and stored properly in the library archives.
Standards: All work under Activity 14 shall be performed in accordance with the standards specified in
Section 5 of this MAS.
Deliverables: In accordance with the TSDN format described in described in Appendix M of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners and the requirements documented in Section 1
and Appendix A of the FEMA Document Control Procedures Manual, the MCC and the City of Renton
shall make the following products available to FEMA:
• Documentation that the news releases were published in accordance with FEMA requirements;
• Documentation that the appropriate Federal Register notices (Proposed and Final Rules) were
published in accordance with FEMA requirements;
• Draft and final Special Correspondence (and all associated enclosures, backup data, and other
related information) for FEMA review and signature as appropriate;
• Draft and final Appeal and Protest acknowledgment, additional data, and resolution letters (and
all associated enclosures, backup data, and other related information) for FEMA review and
signature as appropriate;
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 15
City of Renton, WA
• Draft and final LFDs (and all associated enclosures, backup data, and other related information)
for FEMA review and signature;
• DFIRM negatives and final FIS report materials, including all updated data tables and Flood
Profiles;
• Paperwork for the final DFIRM and FIS report materials;
• Transmittal letters for the printed DFIRM and FIS report;
• LOMC Revalidation Letters if appropriate; and
• Complete, organized archived technical and administrative support data.
Appendix M may be downloaded from the FEMA Flood Hazard Mapping Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fhm/frm gsam.pdf.
SECTION 2-TECHNICAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT DATA
SUBMITTAL
The Project Team members for this Flood Map Project that have responsibilities for activities included in
this MAS shall comply with the data submittal requirements summarized below.
All supporting documentation for the activities in this MAS shall be submitted in the TSDN format in
accordance with Appendix M of the FEMA Guidelines and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping
Partners, dated February 2002. Appendix M is available for viewing or download on the FEMA Web site
at http://www.fema.gov/pdf/fbmJfrm gsam.pdf . Table 2-1 indicates the sections of the TSDN that apply
to each mapping activity.
If any issues arise that could affect the completion of an activity within the proposed scope or budget, the
responsible Mapping Partner shall complete a Special Problem Report (SPR) as soon as possible after the
issue is identified and submitted to FEMA. The SPR is to describe the issue and propose possible
resolutions. (For additional information on SPRs, refer to Appendix M, Subsection M.2.1.1 of Guidelines
and Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners.)
Additionally, the MCC shall collect and maintain a set of products for all Activities and shall compile a
comprehensive TSDN for the entire project.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 16
City of Renton, WA
Table 2-1. Mapping Activities and Applicable TSDN Sections
��
3
E ; Activlttes
�'
�23a
�4
5
",
S
V
'r , "I
v b
_
. S 3s
�'
- h'
General
Documentation
Special Problem
Reports
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Telephone
Conversation Reports
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Meeting
Minutes/Reports
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
General
Correspondence
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Engineering Analyses
Hydrologic Analyses
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Hydraulic Analyses
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Key to Cross -Section
Labeling
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Draft FIS Report
X
X
X
X
Mapping Information
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Miscellaneous
Reference
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Information
SECTION 3-PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE
The mapping activities outlined in this MAS will begin on September 15, 2003, and will be completed no
later than September 30, 2005. The mapping activities may be terminated at the option of FEMA or the
City of Renton in accordance with the provisions of the Partnership Agreement dated ,
2003.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 17
City of Renton, WA
SECTION 4-FUNDING/COST-SHARING
The City of Renton shall provide all resources required to complete the activities assigned to the City,
R.W. Beck, and NHC for this Flood Map Project. FEMA shall provide the resources required to
complete the activities assigned to FEMA and its MCC for this Flood Map Project.
SECTION S-STANDARDS
The standards relevant to this Mapping Activity Statement are provided in Tables 5-1 and 5-2.
Information on the correct volume, appendix, section, or subsection of the FEMA Guidelines and
Specifications for Flood Hazard Mapping Partners to be referenced for each mapping activity are
summarized in Table 5-2. These Guidelines are available for viewing or download from the FEMA Flood
Hazard Mapping Web site at http://www.fema.gov/fhm/dl c s.shtm.
Mapping Activity Statement No.1 18
City of Renton, WA
Table 5-1. Applicable Standards for Project Activities
Guidelines and Specifications for
Flood Hazard Mapping Partners,
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
April 2003
American Congress on Surveying and
Mapping Procedures
X
Global Positioning System (GPS)
Surveys: National Geodetic Survey
(NGS-58), "Guidelines for
X
Establishing GPS-Derived Ellipsoid
Heights," November 1997
Engineer Manual 1110-1-1000,
Photogrammetric Mapping (USACE),
X
July 1, 2002
Engineer Manual 1110-2-1003,
Hydrographic Surveys (USACE),
X
January 1, 2002
"Numerical Models Accepted by FEMA
X
X
X
X
for NFIP Usage," Updated April 2003
Content Standard for Digital
Geospatial Metadata (Federal
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Geographic Data Committee), 1998
Document Control Procedures
X
X
X
Manual, December 2000
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 19
`:ity of Renton, WA
Table 5-2. Project Activities and Applicable Portions of FEMA Guidelines and Specifications
LA'teritti�c
3
_ '
r��¢xa
.',?'LS
rr �
n. _ ., ,�. ,. w� ;.<, 5Y yi . .... .e- .,Y &i;�
,.
a
f�Le+ }'
,.rs./„ - V....`S, t ..� ice" ¢ .� es-',& "'� ,v �, ,.M,'�'M yng^' ^T 1,� �a.
_.u:'.
Volume 1, Sections 1.2, 1.3, 1.4 (specifically Subsection 1.4.2.1)
1
Field Surveys and Reconnaissance
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A, Sections A.4, A.5, A.6, A.7, and A.8
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices B, C, and M
1.
Subsection 1.-4.2.1)
Volume 1, Section- 1.4 (specifically- -
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2
Topographic Data Development
Appendix A, Sections A.2, A.3, A.7 and A.8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix M
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.1 and 1.4.2.1)
3
IndependentQA/QC Review of
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A, Sections A.2, A.3, A.7 (specifically Subsection A.7.5), and A.8
Topographic Data
(specifically Subsection-A:8:6) ----------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix M
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2.2 and 1.4.2.4)
4
Hydrologic Analyses
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A, Section AA
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix C, Sections C.1 and C.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices E, F, G, H, and M
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsection 1.4. 1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Independent QA/QC
Appendix A, Section A.4
5
Review of Hydrologic Analyses
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix C, Section C.2
- -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices E, F, G, H, and M
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 20
City of Renton, WA
Table 5-2. Project Activities and Applicable Portions of FEMA Guidelines and Specifications (Cont'd)
�u�sec�on
w"`.�X,
�� Y
� .;",. 4 ,?. l '..'i�6 �. s'.. W„ X
n � k � 'S �S�" { 1 M'f��✓5z i' � � '3 3 f%
yt
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2.2 and 1.4.2.4)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6
Hydraulic Analyses
Appendix A, Section A.4 (specifically Subsection A.4.7)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix C, Sections C.3 and C.7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices B, E, F, G, H, and M
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsection 1.4.1)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Independent QA/QC Review of
Appendix A, Section AA (specifically Subsection A.4.7)
7
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hydraulic Analyses
Appendix C, Section C.5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices B, E, F, G, H, and M
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsection 1.4.2.3)
Floodplain Mapping (Detailed Riverine
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8
Analysis)
Appendix C, Sections C. 4 and C.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices K, L, and M
Independent QA/QC
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.1 and 1.4.2.3)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9
Review of Floodplain Mapping (Revised
Appendix C, Sections CA and C.6
Areas)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices K, L, and M
Volume 1, Sections 1.3 (specifically Subsection 1.3.1.8) and 1.4 (specifically
10
Base Map Acquisition and Preparation
Subsections 1.4.3.1 and 1.4.3.2) ---------------------------------------------------------------
Appendix A, Section A.1 (specifically Subsection A.1.1)
Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2.2, 1.4.2.3, and 1.4.3.2)
11
DFIRM Production (Non -Revised Areas)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices K, L, and M
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 21
,ity of Renton, WA
Table 5-2. Project Activities and Applicable Portions of FEMA Guidelines and Specifications (Cont'd)
DFIRM Production Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2.3 and 1.4.3.3)
12 (Merging Revised and Non -Revised ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Areas) Appendices K and L
DFIRM Production Volume 1, Section 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2.3, 1.4.3.3, 1.4.3.9, and 1.4.3.10)
12A (Application of DFIRM Graphics and -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Database Specifications) Appendices K and L
Volume 1, Sections 1.4 (specifically Subsections 1.4.2 and 1.4.3) and 1.5 (specifically
13 Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report Subsection 1.5.1)
Distribution
---pendice------ -----n -M ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices J, K, L, and M
Volume 1, Section 1.5 (specifically Subsection 1.5.2)
14 Post -Preliminary Processing ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appendices J, K, L, and M
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 22
City of Renton, WA
SECTION 6-SCHEDULE
The activities documented in this MAS shall be completed in accordance with the project schedule
presented in Table 6-1. If changes to this schedule are required, the responsible Mapping Partner shall
coordinate with FEMA and the other Mapping Partners in a timely manner. As in Table I A earlier in this
MAS, the City of Renton is identified as "CTP." All activities that are to be accomplished by the City of
Renton, R.W. Beck, NHC, or other contractors to the City of Renton that might be selected at a later date
are assigned to "CTP" in the Responsible Partner(s) column in Table 6-1.
Table 6-1. Project Schedule
,,
Fl ESP�ONSIBL
DATE
F�AITNERCS�
QUE
�'
Activity 1 — Field Surveys and Reconnaissance
CTP
09-30-03
Activity 2 — Topographic Data Development
CTP
09-30-03
Activity 3 — Independent QA/QC Review of Topographic Data
FEMA (MCC)
10-31-03
Activity 4 — Hydrologic Analyses
CTP
11-30-03
Activity 5— Independent QA/QC Review of Hydrologic Analyses
FEMA (MCC)
12-31-03
Activity 6 — Hydraulic Analyses
CTP
01-31-04
Activity 7 — Independent QA/QC Review of Hydraulic Analyses
FEMA (MCC)
02-28-04
Activity 8 — Floodplain Mapping (Detailed Riverine Analysis)
CTP
03-31-04
Activity 9 — Independent QA/QC Review of Floodplain Mapping
FEMA (MCC)
04-30-04
(Revised Areas)
Activity 10 — Base Map Acquisition
CTP
11-30-03
Activity 11 — DFIRM Production (Non -Revised Areas)
FEMA (MCC)
05-15-04
Activity 12 — DFIRM Production (Merging Revised and Non-
FEMA (MCC)
07-15-04
Revised Information)
Activity 12A — Application of DFIRM Graphic and Database
FEMA (MCC)
08-15-04
Specifications
Activity 13 — Preliminary DFIRM and FIS Report Distribution
FEMA (MCC)
09-01-04
Activity 14 — Post -Preliminary Processing
CTP,
FCCMA
09-30-05
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 23
City of Renton, Washington
SECTION 7-CERTIFICATIONS
The following certifications apply to this MAS:
Activity 1 (Field Surveys and Reconnaissance) and Activity 2 (Topographic Data Development)
A Registered Professional Engineer or Licensed Land Surveyor shall certify topographic information,
in accordance with 44 CFR 65.5(c). Certification of topographic information by the American Society
for Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing is also acceptable.
Activity 4 (Hydrologic Analyses). Activity 6 (Hydraulic Analyses), Activity 8 (Floodplain
Mapping— Detailed Riverine Analysis)
A Registered Professional Engineer shall certify the hydrologic and hydraulic analyses and data in
accordance with 44 CFR 65.6(f).
Activity 8 (Floodplain Mapping— Detailed Riverine Analysis), Activity 9 (Independent QA/QC
Review of F000dplain Mapping {Revised Areas)), Activity 11 (DFIRM Production {Non -Revised
Areas)), Activity 12 (DFIRM Production {Merging Revised and Non -Revised Information}),
and Activity 12A (DFIRM Production {Application of DFIRM Graphics and Database
Specifications))
The DFIRM metadata files shall include a description of the horizontal and vertical accuracy of the
DFIRM base map and floodplain information.
Activity 10 (Base Map Acquisition and Preparation)
• A community official or responsible party shall provide written certification that the digital data
meet FEMA minimum standards and specifications.
• The responsible Mapping Partner (City of Renton) shall provide documentation that the digital
base map can be used by FEMA.
SECTION 8-TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND RESOURCES
Project Team members may obtain copies of FEMA-issued LOMCs, archived engineering backup data,
and data collected as part of the Mapping Needs Assessment Process from the MCC, who may be
contacted by telephone at 703-317-3062 or by facsimile at 703-317-3023.
General technical and programmatic information, such as FEMA 265 and the Quick-2 computer program,
can be downloaded from the FEMA Web site (www.fe.ma.gov/fhrn/). Specific technical and
programmatic support may be provided through the MCC; such assistance should be requested through
the FEMA Project Officer specified in Section 11 of this MAS.
Project Team members also may consult with the FEMA Regional Project Officer to request support in
the areas of selection of data sources, digital data accuracy standards, assessment of vertical data
accuracy, data collection methods or subcontractors, and Geographic Information System -based
engineering and modeling training.
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 24
City of Renton, Washington
SECTION 9-CONTRACTORS
The City of Renton intends to use the services of R.W. Beck, Inc., and Northwest Hydraulic Consultants
as contractors for this Flood Map Project. The City of Renton shall ensure that the procurement for all
contractors used for this Flood Map Project complies with the requirements of 44 CFR 13.36.
Part 13 may be downloaded in PDF or text format from the U.S. Government Printing Office Web site at
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx 02/44cfrl3 02.htm1.
SECTION 10-FINANCIAL REPORTING
Because funding has not been provided to the City of Renton by FEMA for this Flood Map Project, no
financial reporting by the City of Renton is required.
SECTION 11-POINTS OF CONTACT
The points of contact for this Flood Map Project are Joe Weber, the FEMA Regional Project Officer;
Allen Quynn, the Project Manager for the City of Renton; or subsequent personnel of comparable
experience who are appointed to fulfill these responsibilities. When necessary, the assistance of the MCC
should be requested through the FEMA Project Officer, Max Yuan.
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1 25
City of Renton, Washington
Each party has caused this MAS to be executed by its duly authorized representative.
Allen Quynn
Project Manager
City of Renton
Joseph T. Weber, Jr.
Regional Project Officer
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Region X
Max H. Yuan
Project Officer
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Dan Sokol
State NFIP Coordinator
Washington State Department of Ecology
Mapping Activity Statement No. 1
City of Renton, Washington
Date (Printed)
Date (Printed)
Date (Printed)
Date (Printed)
26
t I
q a �- aoo3
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
RESOLUTION NO. 34 /O D
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CLERK TO ENTER INTO AN
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT AGENCY (F.E.M.A.).
WHEREAS, F.E.M.A. is responsible for establishing flood plain maps; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to have the flood plain map updated for the Springbrook
Creek area; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to complete certain hydrologic and hydraulic modeling
preparatory to updating of the flood plain maps; and
WHEREAS, F.E.M.A. will review and approve the modeling methodology of flood plain
maps; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to establish the responsibilities, timing, and criteria to be
used in updating the flood plain map for Springbrook Creek;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects.
SECTION II. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized to enter into an
interlocal cooperative agreement with F.E.M.A. entitled "Federal Emergency Management
Agency Cooperating Technical Partnership Agreement."
1
a
RESOLUTION NO.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2003.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2003.
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
RES.1006:8/27/03:ma
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
2
9/RAlaoo3
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 5'017
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING CHAPTERS 4-2, 4-3, AND 4-4 OF TITLE IV
(DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260
ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
RENTON, WASHINGTON- TO ALLOW URBAN STYLE MULTI-
FAMILY HOUSING IN THE SUBURBAN CENTER OVERLAY
DISTRICT WITHIN THE HIGHLANDS REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I. Subsection "Attached dwellings" in Section 4-2-060.C,
Residential, of Chapter 2, "Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards," of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington" is hereby amended to change the text in the CS cell from "P20" to "P73."
SECTION II. Section 4-2-070.K, "Center Suburban (CS)," of Chapter 2,
"Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance
No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby
amended to change the text in the cell for "Attached dwelling" under "RESIDENTIAL" from
"P #20" to "P #73."
SECTION III. Section 4-2-080.A, "Conditions Associated With Zoning Use
Tables," of Chapter 2, "Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards,"of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington" is hereby amended by adding a new subsection, 73, to read as follows:
73. a. Subject to the density limitations located in the development
standards for this zone. Projects within the Suburban and Neighborhood Center
Residential Bonus District, RMC 4-3-095.B.3, are also subject to the provisions and
1
ORDINANCE NO.
development standards in RMC 4-3-095.0 and D, Suburban and Neighborhood Center
Residential Bonus District.
b. Within the Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation,
attached dwelling unit developments in the range of 10 to 20 dwelling units per net acre
may only be townhouse unit types.
SECTION IV. The CN and CS zone cells of the "Maximum Density within
Suburban and Neighborhood Residential Bonus District"" portion of Section 4-2-120.A of
Chapter 2, "Zoning Districts — Uses And Standards," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of
Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington"
are hereby amended to read as shown in Attachment 1.
SECTION V. The CS zone cell of "Minimum Onsite Landscape Width Along the
Street Frontage Required When a Commercial Lot is Adjacent to Property Zoned Residential,
RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14, or RM" portion of Section 4-2-120.A of Chapter 2, "Zoning
Districts — Uses and Standards," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260
entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to
read as shown in Attachment 2.
SECTION VI. The CS zone cell of "Maximum Building Height, except for Public
uses with a `Public Suffix' (P) designatioWo" portion of Section 4-2-120.A of Chapter 2,
"Zoning Districts — Uses and Standards," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance
No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby
amended to read as shown in Attachment 2.A.
2
ORDINANCE NO.
SECTION VII.
Sections 4-3-095.B.1, 2, and 3 of Chapter 3, "Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No.
4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby
amended to read as follows:
4-3-095.B APPLICABILITY:
This section applies to all residential development and mixed commercial/residential
development proposed within the following districts.
1. Centers Residential Bonus District A: That area depicted in subsections B.4.a and
BA.b of this Section within one hundred fifty feet (150') of the public right -of- ways of Sunset
Blvd. NE and NE 4th St. within the Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center Zoning
Designations.
2. Centers Residential Bonus District B: That area depicted in subsections BA.a, and
B.4.b of this Section beginning one hundred fifty feet (150') from the public rights -of -way of
Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 4th St. within the Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center Zoning
Designations.
3. Centers Residential Bonus District C: That area depicted in subsection BA.c of
this Section within the Suburban Center Zoning Designation.
SECTION VIII. Section 4-3-095.B.4 of Chapter 3, "Environmental Regulations and
Overlay Districts," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code
of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as shown
in Attachment 3.
SECTION IX. Sections 4-3-095.0 and D of Chapter 3, "Environmental
Regulations and Overlay Districts," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No.
3
ORDINANCE NO.
4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" are hereby
amended to read as shown in Attachment 4.
SECTION X. Section 4-3-095.E of Chapter 3, "Environmental Regulations and
Overlay Districts," of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code
of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows:
E. MODIFICATION PROCEDURE:
To provide greater flexibility in meeting the purpose of the Centers Residential Bonus
District, projects within Districts A and B that do not meet the special development standards of
subsection D of this Section may be approved through a modification process when superior
design is demonstrated. Except for projects within District C, application may be made for
modification of these development standards pursuant to RMC 4-9-250.D and the decision
criteria stipulated in RMC 4-9-250.D.2. For a modification to be granted, applicants must
comply with the design criteria in RMC 4-9-250.D.2 and D.3. Projects within District C must
request a variance to deviate from these code provisions.
SECTION XI. The "Attached dwellings (structured parking) in the CD, RM-U,
and RM-T Zones:" and the "Attached dwellings (surface parking/private garage/carport parking)
in CD,'RM-U, and RM-T Zones:" portions of the Parking Use Table, in Section 4-4-080.F.10.e
of Chapter 4, "City -Wide Property Development Standards," of Title IV (Development
Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton,
Washington" are hereby amended to consolidate the two rows and to read as shown in
Attachment 5.
SECTION XII. This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and
five days after its publication.
4
ORDINANCE NO.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2003.
Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2003.
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication:
ORD.1041:9/5/03:ma
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
5
Attachment 1
DENSITY (Net Density in I CN I CS
Dwelling Units per Net Acre)
ximum Density within
burban and Neighborhood
sidential Bonus District
b)
to 60 dwelling units per net
e may be granted for
vision of: (a) mixed use
jests defined as a minimum
►th of 30 feet of commercial
on the first floor of the
nary structure facing the
Trial, and (b) parking
,losed under or enclosed
iin the first floor of the
nary structure with either
or rear access.
B (RMC 4-3-095B4a
b)
bonus for architectural
novation may be approved up
a total of 36 dwelling units pe
.t acre through the
odification process of RMC 4-
095E and the design criteria
RMC 4-9-250D3.
b)
to 60 dwelling units per net
e may be granted for
vision of: (a) mixed use
jects defined as a minimum
ith of 30 feet of commercial
on the first floor of the
nary structure facing the
trial, and (b) parking
.losed under or enclosed
iin the first floor of the
nary structure with either
or rear access.
B (RMC 4-3-09564a
b)
bonus for architectural
novation may be approved up
a total of 36 dwelling units per
�t acre through the
odification process of RMC 4-
095E and the design criteria
RMC 4-9-250133.
C (RMC 4-3-095B4c)
to 80 dwelling units per net
e may be granted for
vision of: (a) a minimum
►th of 30 feet and a minimum
gth of 60 feet of commercial
on the first floor of the
nary structure, and (b)
king enclosed under or
:losed within the first floor of
primary structure.
Attachment 2
LANDSCAPING
CS
Minimum Onsite Landscape
15 ft. wide landscape buffer is
Width Along the Street
required 3 unless otherwise
Frontage Required When a
determined by the Reviewing
Commercial Lot is Adjacent$
Official through the site plan
o Property Zoned
review process.
Residential, RC, R-1, R-5, R-8,
R-10, R-14, or RM
Attachment 2.A
HEIGHT
CS
Maximum Building Height,
50 ft. except when abutting
except for Public uses with
lots zoned R-8, RMH, R-10,
"Public Suffix" (P)
R-14, RIVIA or RM-C, then
designation20
45 ft. 26
In the area depicted in RMC
-3-095134c, in no case may
heights of commercial,
residential, or mixed -use
buildings exceed 45 ft.
maximum height for portions
of property within 80 ft. of an
R-8 or R-10 property line
unless a modification through
site plan review process is
requested.
Heights in other areas may
xceed the maximum height
ith a Conditional Use
Permit. 16
Attachment 3
4. Centers Residential Bonus District Maps:
a.
51
NE 2nd Si
C.
This figure is a graphic representation, not guaranteed to survey accuracy. To find the
district(s) applicable to a specific parcel, refer to RMC 4-3-095B1, 132, and 133.
Attachment 4
4-3-095.0
USES PERMITTED IN CENTERS RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT(S):
The following residential uses are permitted in addition to all other nonresidential
uses, existing flats/townhomes, and accessory uses permitted in the underlying zoning.
Flats, when in a mixed use
structure that combines
residential with a first floor
commercial use(s) and when
located above the first floor.
Adult family homes
4-3-095.D
Detached dwelling
Semi -attached dwelling; up to 4
consecutively attached
Townhouses, up to 4 consecutively
attached
Adult family homes
Boarding and lodging houses
Group homes II, for 6 or less
Group homes 11, for 7 or more
Retirement residences
Flats or townhouses, when in a
mixed use structure that combines
residential with a first floor
commercial use(s).
Adult family homes
SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND
RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL USES LOCATED WITHIN THE CENTERS
RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT:
Unless special development standards are specified below in this subsection, the
development standards listed in the underlying CS and CN zoning are applicable. The
modification procedure specified in subsection E of this Section may be used for
residential and residential/commercial mixed use projects proposing to exceed the
development standards in this subsection.
1
40, i'4ETF'YC .. 1N.
�5"?yi'NTr;.:4
Site Layout
NA
Provide access and
NA
infrastructure to serve the
development equivalent to
those requirements
established in the subdivision
regulations.
On -site Open
None
None
Attached housing
Space
developments of 10 or
more dwelling units shall
Requirement
provide a minimum
aggregated area of
common open space or
recreation area of at least
50 square feet per unit.
The location, layout, and
proposed type of common
space or recreation area
shall be subject to approval
b the Reviewing Official.
Minimum Land
None
Minimum Land Area per
None
Area per Dwelling
Dwelling Unit: 1,200 sq. ft.
including building footprint.
Unit
Within this square footage
250 sq. ft. must be developed
in landscaping or private yard
abutting each unit.
'
Minimum Lot Size
None
None
None
.... �. ..
i, R
.'2 'vi..,w
k
y�
�`ut 'SC� '� ��•,
wS�n,..:Ya, Srt '"a?.A,r� �.a
+'rS'�lwSS
C'�, d N � � k'_. g,:�'
✓�.'�_ts.e .. Urt( 3', k d._.,,
.k.N ,W R,'fi�wr,�:. A .J.,a.a.:.,�3,._Y,mry _n,h
,1„t. .�....5 .�,f.� ..B J, Aw',fr�A�a?✓k...�.iu.:
Maximum Lot
Use standards in the base
65%
Use standards in base zone.
Coverage For
zone.
Buildings
.}!
MBI ` .. c w r..�
w1.. � s.
FSetbacks,
€ ". =TSksfir,�.1f �#"r�. >;� �. -. s: -�:'✓
W
'k'r77' �fE.rZ�*�y,4n��+J'�l' lNq SV i71
�aa. ;
1 a, „ ��k..,."3i'k�� w rKi..a' - .�.n -t x
e3 _ „t.. - F ,. �t,<
General
Use standards in the base
A 3 ft. minimum side setback
Use standards in base zone.
zone.
is required and no projections
are allowed (e.g., eaves, bay
windows) within the setback.
Special Setbacks —
Not subject to maximum
Not subject to maximum
Not subject to maximum
Detached
setback. Not permitted
setback. Not permitted within
setback. Not permitted
within 20 ft. of a public
20 ft. of a public street.
within 20 ft. of a public
Accessory Garages
street. Garages must
Garages must provide a
street. Garages must
provide a minimum 24 ft.
minimum 24 ft. of back out
provide a minimum 24 ft.
of back out space
space including the alley.
of back out space including
including the alle .
the alley.
;W,1�
Building Design
1) Variation or
1) Variation or modulation
1) Variation or
modulation of vertical and
of vertical and
modulation of vertical and
r
t
Standards
horizontal facades is
horizontal facades is
horizontal facades is
required at a minimum of
required at a minimum
required at a minimum of 2
2 ft. at an interval of a
of 2 ft. at an interval of
ft. at an interval of a
minimum of 40 ft. on a
a minimum of 40 ft. on
minimum of 40 ft. on a
building face.
a building face.
building face.
2) Modulation of
2) Private residential entry
2) Modulation of
roof lines is required.
features which are
designed to provide
individual ground floor
connection to the
outside are required.
roof lines is
required.
3) Building must be
oriented to the
street and have the
primary building
pedestrian
entry(ies) facing
the street and
clearly visible
from the street.
4) Project must
provide direct
pedestrian access
to abutting uses.
Maximum
No requirement
100 ft., except for retirement
No requirement
Building Length
residences.
Building Location
None
The relationship of the
None
Standards
dwelling, parking and the
street shall create the
appearance of a single family
neighborhood.
Residential units and any
associated commercial
development within an
overall development shall be
connected through
organization of roads, block,
yards, central places,
pedestrian linkages and
amenity features.
Front facades of structures
shall address the public
street, private street or court
by providing: a landscaped
pedestrian connection, and an
entry feature facing the front
yard.
Garage
Not permitted to open
Not permitted to open
Not permitted to open
Structure/Entry
directly onto a principal
directly onto a principal or
directly onto a principal
arterial street.
minor arterial street.
arterial street.
and Exit
Maximum UnitS
No requirement
4 units maximum
No requirement
per Building
� , na�t.,v�h.1d".�1'f�"
'wA �.� 3`,�44a. 'A, .. ,P ..��iv
✓C',�+e... u. i,a L �,. F .>..+I'#' % F.. , ok.l d/ , ��r
,a. ir, .�� a :�h -hu ., .�l F
Maximum Height Height
50 ft.
35 ft.
50 ft.
In no case may heights
exceed 45 feet maximum
height for portions of
property within 80 feet of
an R-8 or R-10 property
line unless a modification
through site plan review
process is requested.
r-t 9'-L�tr
rr
.r
#t}?'rl' •tt}ART 7 i„(b. 5t.c6A'ayw
L-y,
�`il. it �k ; "Ya)y.Y )4�. �+'yh Yi� ""MI Ci'4r i $ t'n` ,'vz y.'x �) ,1 h'1'x?{l�'':4 �' `s L �� _:
Parking Location
As required in RMC 44-
As required in RMC 4-4-080
As required in RMC 44-
080 with the following
with the following additional
080 with the following
additional requirements.
requirements.
additional requirements.
The required number of
Must be within an enclosed
Parking for the residential
parking spaces for the
structure (detached or
component of the project
residential units shall be
attached garage). Garage
must be within a structured
provided within an
must be located on a different
parking garage.
enclosed garage. The
fagade from the main entry of
required .25 guest spaces
the building. The required .25
Commercial and guest
per residential unit may
guest spaces per attached
parking may be provided
be surface parking. No
residential units may be
as surface parking so long
more than 6 stalls may be
surface parking. No more
as no parking shall be
consecutively clustered
than 6 stalls may be
located between a building
without an intervening
consecutively clustered
and the property line
landscaped area of a
without an intervening
abutting a public street.
minimum of 5 ft. in width
landscaped area of a
by the length of the stall.
minimum of 5 ft. in width by
Parking garages shall be
Surface parking not
the length of the stall.
designed so as not to
permitted within the first
Surface parking not allowed
dominate the fagade of the
30 ft. of any street
within the first 30 ft. on any
residential building.
frontage.
street frontage. Parking must
Parking garage entries
be located to the rear of the
shall be designed to
primary structure or in a
minimize the apparent
detached garage with rear
width of garage entries so
access.
as not to subordinate the
pedestrian entry of the
structure.
Parking within the building
shall be enclosed or
screened through any
combination of walls,
Attachment 5
ATTACHED DWELLINGS IN CD, RM-U, AND RM-T ZONES:
Resident and guest spaces:
Within the CD, CS (only District C as shown in
RMC 4-3-095B.4.a), RM-U, and RM T Zones:
1.8 per 3 bedroom or larger dwelling unit;
1.6 per 2 bedroom dwelling unit;
1.2 per 1 bedroom or studio dwelling unit.
RM T Zone Exemption: An exemption to the
standard parking ratio formula may be granted by
the Development Services Director allowing 1
parking space per dwelling unit for developments of
less than 5 dwelling units with 2 bedrooms or less
per unit provided adequate on -street parking is
available in the vicinity of the development.
Raiw V��/Z,003
/5f F'eaGi/nq g11s/Zoo3
9�a2/aoo3
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. SW
AN ORDINANCE relating to the waterworks utility of the City, including the
sewerage system as a part thereof; providing for the issuance of $8,035,000
aggregate principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds,
2003, of the City for the purpose of obtaining the funds with which to refund,
on a current basis, and defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer
Refunding and Improvement Revenue Bonds, 1993 and to advance refund and
defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994;
fixing the date, form, denominations, maturities, interest rates, terms and
covenants of the bonds; providing for bond insurance; and approving the sale
and providing for the delivery of the bonds to D.A. Davidson & Co., Seattle,
Washington.
ORDINANCE NO.
Section1. Definitions ..... :................................................................................................................ 3
Section 2. Findings Regarding Parity Provisions.........................................................................10
Section 3. Authorization and Description of Bonds.....................................................................10
Section 4. Registration of Bonds and Book -Entry System...........................................................I
I
Section5. Payment of Bonds........................................................................................................13
Section 6. No Redemption; Open Market Purchase of Bonds......................................................14
Section7. Form of Bonds.............................................................................................................14
Section8. Execution of Bonds......................................................................................................14
Section 9. Authentication and Delivery of Bonds by Bond Registrar..........................................15
Section 10. Registration, Transfer and Exchange.........................................................................15
Section 11. Lost, Stolen or Destroyed Bonds...............................................................................17
Section12. Creation of Fund........................................................................................................18
Section13. Deposits into Funds...................................................................................................18
Section14. Flow of Funds............................................................................................................20
Section 15. Pledge of Revenue and Lien Position........................................................................20
Section 16. Findings Regarding Sufficiency of Revenue.............................................................20
Section17. Covenants...................................................................................................................21
Section 18. No Private Activity Bonds.........................................................................................24
Section 19. Defeasance of the Bonds............................................................................................24
Section 20. Provision for Future Parity Bonds.............................................................................26
Section 22. Approval of Purchase Agreement..............................................................................28
Section23. Bond Insurance..........................................................................................................28
Section 24. Delivery of Bonds; Temporary Bonds.......................................................................29
Section 25. Call of 1993 Bonds for Redemption..........................................................................30
i
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 26. Acquisition of Escrow Obligations............................................................................30
Section 27. Verification of Sufficiency of Escrow.......................................................................31
Section28. Escrow Agreement.....................................................................................................31
Section 29. Application of Bond Proceeds...................................................................................31
Section 30. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure.........................................................32
Section 31. Preliminary Official Statement Deemed Final...........................................................35
Section 32. Contract; Savings Clause............................................................................................35
Section 33. Effective Date of Ordinance......................................................................................36
EXHIBIT A Form of Escrow Agreement
ii
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE relating to the waterworks utility of the City, including the
sewerage system as a part thereof; providing for the issuance of $8,035,000
aggregate principal amount of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds,
2003, of the City for the purpose of obtaining the funds with which to refund,
on a current basis, and defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer
Refunding and Improvement Revenue Bonds, 1993 and to advance refund and
defease all of the City's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994;
fixing the date, form, denominations, maturities, interest rates, terms and
covenants of the bonds; providing for bond insurance; and approving the sale
and providing for the delivery of the bonds to D.A. Davidson & Co., Seattle,
Washington.
WHEREAS, the City has heretofore created and operated a waterworks utility of the
City, including the sewerage system of the City and within that system a system of storm and
surface water sewers (defined herein as the "Waterworks Utility"); and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 3188, the City provided for the issuance of the Water and
Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 1977, Issue No. 3 (the "1977 Bonds"), and, by Section 17 of
that ordinance, established certain conditions for the issuance of additional water and sewer
revenue bonds on a parity of lien with the 1977 Bonds; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 4709, the City provided for the issuance of the 1998
Bonds, and, by Section XXIII of that ordinance, provided that upon the date on which the 1977
Bonds and certain water and sewer revenue bonds issued on a parity of lien therewith were fully
redeemed, refunded or defeased, the right of the City to issue bonds on a party of lien with the
1977 Bonds would be permanently revoked; and
WHEREAS, all of such water and sewer revenue bonds have been paid and redeemed, or
irrevocable provision for their payment and redemption has been made, except for the
outstanding Refunded Bonds; and
fArenton\w&s revretD3
ORDINANCE NO.
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 39.53 RCW, the City is authorized to issue and sell,
without an election, revenue bonds of the City to refund all of the outstanding Refunded Bonds;
and
WHEREAS, the City reserved the right to defease the Refunded Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the refunding and defeasance of the Refunded Bonds will provide a debt
service savings to the City and a modification of the covenants and other terms of the Parity
Bonds; and
WHEREAS, by Section XXIII of Ordinance No. 4709, the City also provided that it may
issue additional water and sewer revenue bonds which will constitute a charge and lien upon,the
revenue of the Waterworks Utility of the City on a parity with the 1998 Bonds and any bonds
issued thereafter if such additional bonds are issued in compliance with the conditions set forth
therein; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. 4976, the City issued the 2002 Bonds on a parity of lien
with the 1998 Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the City to
issue and sell $8,035,000 of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2003 on a parity of
lien with the 1998 Bonds and the 2002 Bonds to provide part of the funds necessary to carry out
the Refunding Plan and to pay the costs of issuance and sale of the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, MBIA Insurance Corporation has made a commitment to issue an insurance
policy insuring the payment when due of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as provided
therein, and the City Council deems that the purchase of such policy is in the best interest of the
City; and
2
f:\renton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
WHEREAS, D.A. Davidson & Co., Seattle, Washington, has offered to purchase the
Bonds under the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth; NOW, THEREFORE,
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN as
follows:
Section 1. Definitions. As used in this ordinance, the following words shall have the
following meanings:
"Alternate Security" shall mean any bond insurance, collateral, security, letter of credit,
guaranty, surety bond or similar credit enhancement device providing for or securing the
payment of all or part of the principal of and interest on the Parity Bonds, issued by an institution
that has been assigned a credit rating at the time of issuance of such Parity Bonds secured by
such Alternate Security equal to or better than the highest then -existing rating for any of the
Parity Bonds.
"Annual Debt Service" for any year shall mean all the interest on plus all principal
(except principal of Term Bonds due in any Term Bond Maturity Year) of Parity Bonds, plus all
mandatory redemption and sinking fund installments, less all bond interest payable from the
proceeds of any such bonds, which will mature or come due in that year.
"Average Annual Debt Service" shall mean the sum of the Annual Debt Service for the
remaining years to the last scheduled maturity of the applicable bond issue or issues divided by
the number of those years.
"Beneficial Owner" shall mean, with respect to any Bond, the Person named on the
records of the Custodian as having the right, without a physical certificate evidencing such right,
fArenton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
to transfer, to hypothecate and to receive the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, and
interest on such Bond as the same becomes due and payable.
"Bond Fund" shall mean that special fund of the City known as the 2003 Waterworks
Revenue Bond Fund created by this ordinance for the payment of the principal of and interest on
the Bonds.
"Bond Insurer" shall mean MBIA Insurance Corporation.
"Bond Insurance Policy" shall mean the municipal bond insurance policy issued by the
Bond Insurer insuring the payment when due of the principal of and interest on the Bonds as
provided herein.
"Bond Register" shall mean the registration books on which are maintained the names
and addresses of the Owners of the Bonds.
"Bond Registrar" shall mean the fiscal agencies of the State in Seattle, Washington, and
New York, New York, as the same shall be designated from time to time.
"Bonds" shall mean the $8,035,000 City of Renton Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding
Bonds, 2003, authorized to be issued by this ordinance.
"Book -Entry Termination Date" shall mean the fifth business day following the date of
receipt by the Bond Registrar of the City's request to terminate the book -entry system of
registering the beneficial ownership of the Bonds.
"City" shall mean the City of Renton, Washington, a duly organized and legally existing
noncharter code city under the laws of the State.
"City Finance Director" shall mean the City's Finance and Information Services
Administrator or the successor to such officer.
4
f:\renton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
"Closing" shall mean the date of the delivery of the Bonds by the City to the Purchaser
and the payment therefor by the Purchaser.
"Code" shall mean the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable rules
and regulations promulgated thereunder.
"Coverage Requirement" shall mean in any calendar year 1.25 times the Maximum
Annual Debt Service.
"Custodian" shall mean (a) The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York, or
(b) any successor thereto engaged by the City to operate a book -entry system for recording,
through electronic or manual means, the beneficial ownership of the Bonds, in which system no
physical certificates are issued to the Beneficial Owners of the Bonds, but in which a limited
number of physical certificates are issued to and registered in the name of the Custodian or its
nominee, and delivered to the Custodian; provided, that such book -entry system operated by the
Custodian may include the use of subsystems of recording the beneficial ownership of Bonds
which are operated by parties other than the Custodian and the use of a nominee for the
Custodian; and the term "Custodian," as used herein, includes any party operating any such
subsystem.
"Escrow Agreement" shall mean that certain Escrow Agreement, to be dated as of
September 30, 2003, by and between the City and the Escrow Trustee in substantially the form of
Exhibit A hereto, which is incorporated herein by this reference.
"Escrow Obligations" shall mean those certain noncallable direct obligations of the
United States of America listed on Schedule 1 attached to the Escrow Agreement.
5
fArenton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
"Escrow Trustee" shall mean U.S. Bank National Association, acting in its fiduciary
capacity as escrow trustee pursuant to the Escrow Agreement.
"Future Parity Bonds" shall mean all water and sewer revenue bonds of the City issued
after the date of the issuance of the Bonds and having a lien and charge on Net Revenue on a
parity with the lien and charge on Net Revenue for the payment of the principal of and interest
on the Bonds.
"Gross Revenue" shall mean Revenue of the Waterworks Utility.
"Letter of Representations" shall mean the Blanket Issuer Letter of Representations
from the City and the Bond Registrar to the Custodian dated April 15, 1997, pertaining to the.
payment of the Bonds and the "book -entry" system for evidencing the beneficial ownership of
the Bonds prior to the Book -Entry Termination Date (as it may be amended from time to time).
"Maintenance and Operation Expense" shall mean all reasonable expenses incurred by
the City in causing the Waterworks Utility to be operated and maintained in good repair, working
order and condition, including payments made to any other municipal corporation or private
entity for water service and for sewage treatment and disposal service or other utility service in
the event the City combines such service in the Waterworks Utility and enters into a contract for
such service, and including pro-rata budget charges for the City's administration expenses where
those represent a reasonable distribution and share of actual costs, but not including any
depreciation or taxes levied or imposed by the City or payments to the City in lieu of taxes, or
capital additions or capital replacements to the Waterworks Utility.
6
fArenton\w&s revrefll3
ORDINANCE NO.
"Maximum Annual Debt Service" shall mean, at the time of calculation, the maximum
amount of Annual Debt Service that will mature or come due in the current calendar year or any
future calendar year on the outstanding Parity Bonds.
"MSRB" shall mean the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.
"Net Revenue" shall mean Gross Revenue less Maintenance and Operation Expense.
"1993 Bonds" shall mean the outstanding Water and Sewer Refunding and Improvement
Revenue Bonds, 1993.
.e
"1994 Bonds" shall mean the outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994.
"1998 Bonds" shall mean the outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds,
"NRMSIR" shall mean a nationally recognized municipal securities information
repository designated by the SEC.
"Owner" shall mean the person named as the registered owner of a Bond on the Bond
Register.
"Parity Bonds" shall mean the 1998 Bonds, the 2002 Bonds, the Bonds and any Future
Parity Bonds.
"Parity Bond Fund" shall mean any fund created for the payment and redemption of
Parity Bonds.
"Professional Utility Consultant" shall mean an independent licensed professional
engineer, certified public accountant or other independent person or firm selected by the City
having a favorable reputation for skill and experience with municipal utilities of comparable size
7
fArenton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
and character to the Waterworks Utility in such areas as are relevant to the purposes for which
such consultant is retained.
"Purchase Agreement" shall mean the Bond Purchase Agreement for the Bonds, dated
September 22, 2003, by and between the City and the Purchaser.
"Purchaser" shall mean D.A. Davidson & Co., Seattle, Washington.
"Rate Stabilization Fund" shall mean the fund of that name created for the purposes
described in Ordinance No. 4709.
"Refunded Bonds" shall mean, collectively, the 1993 Bonds and the 1994 Bonds.
"Refunding Plan" shall mean the plan to refund, on a current basis, and defease the •,
outstanding 1993 Bonds, to advance refund and defease the outstanding 1994 Bonds and to pay
certain "incidental costs and costs related to the sale and issuance" (as defined in RCW
39.46.070) of the Bonds, all as more particularly defined and described in the Escrow
Agreement.
"Reserve Fund" shall mean that special fund of the City known as the Waterworks
Revenue Bond Reserve Fund created by Ordinance No. 4709 for purpose of securing the
payment of the principal of and interest on all bonds to which Net Revenue is pledged.
"Reserve Insurance" shall mean, in lieu of cash and investments, insurance obtained by
the City equal to part or all of the Reserve Requirement for any Parity Bonds then outstanding
for which such insurance is obtained, issued by an institution that has been assigned a credit
rating equal to or better than the highest then -existing rating for any of the Parity Bonds.
"Reserve Requirement" shall mean the Maximum Annual Debt Service.
8
F.\renton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
"Revenue of the Waterworks Utility" shall mean all of the earnings and revenues
received by the City from the maintenance and operation of the Waterworks Utility and all
earnings from the investment of money in the Reserve Fund or any Parity Bond Fund, and
connection and capital improvement charges collected for the purpose of defraying the cost of
capital facilities of the Waterworks Utility, except government grants, proceeds from the sale of
Waterworks Utility property (other than timber), City taxes collected by or through the
Waterworks Utility, principal proceeds of bonds and earnings or proceeds from any investments
in a trust, defeasance or escrow fund created to defease or refund Waterworks Utility obligations
(until commingled with other earnings and revenues of the Waterworks Utility) or held in a
special account for the purpose of paying a rebate to the United States Government under the
Code.
"Rule" shall mean SEC Rule 15c2-12.
"SEC" shall mean the United States Securities and Exchange Commission.
"SID" shall mean a state information depository.
"State" shall mean the State of Washington.
"Term Bonds" shall mean any Parity Bonds identified as such in the ordinance
authorizing the issuance thereof, the payment of which is provided for by a requirement for
mandatory deposits of money into the principal and interest account of the bond redemption fund
created for the payment of such issue of bonds in accordance with a mandatory sinking fund
requirement.
"Term Bond Maturity Year" shall mean any calendar year in which Term Bonds are
scheduled to mature.
9
f\renton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
"2002 Bonds" shall mean the outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 2002.
"Waterworks Utility" shall mean the combined water and sewerage systems, including
the storm and surface water sewers, of the City as the same may be added to, improved and
extended for as long as any of the Parity Bonds are outstanding.
"Waterworks Utility Fund" shall mean that special fund of the City into which all Gross
Revenue (except for earnings in any special fund for the redemption of revenue obligations of
the Waterworks Utility) shall be deposited.
Section 2. Findings Regarding Parity Provisions The City Council finds that there is no
deficiency in any Parity Bond Fund, that provisions hereinafter meet the conditions for the --
issuance of Future Parity Bonds as set forth in Ordinance Nos. 4709 and 4976 and that there will
be on file prior to the issuance and delivery of the Bonds a certificate of the City Finance
Director [a Professional Utility Consultant] that satisfies the conditions for such certificate as set
forth in Ordinance Nos. 4709 and 4976. Therefore, the Bonds shall be issued on a parity of lien
with the Parity Bonds.
Section 3. Authorization and Description of Bonds. For the purpose of obtaining part of
the funds necessary to carry out the Refunding Plan, the City shall issue the Bonds in the
aggregate principal amount of $8,035,000. The Bonds shall be designated "City of Renton,
Washington Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2003;" shall be dated September 15,
2003; shall be in the denomination of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof within a single
maturity; shall be numbered separately, in the manner and with any additional designation as the
Bond Registrar deems necessary for purpose of identification; shall bear interest (computed on
the basis of a 360-day year of twelve 30-day months), payable semiannually on each June 1 and
10
fArenton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
December 1, commencing December 1, 2003, to the maturity of the Bonds; and shall mature on
June 1 in the years and amounts and bear interest at the rates per annum as follows:
Maturity Years
(June 1)
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
Amounts
$1,100,000.00
1,000,000.00
1,050,000.00
1,085,000.00.
1,130,000.00
825,000.00
685,000.00
355,000.00
390,000.00
415,000.00
Interest
Rates
2.000%
2.000
2.000
3.500
3.750
2.850
3.200
3.400
3.600
3.700
If any Bond is duly presented for payment upon maturity and is not paid, then interest thereon
shall continue to accrue thereafter at the rate stated therein until such Bond is paid.
The Bonds shall be negotiable instruments to the extent provided by RCW 62A.8-105.
Section 4. Registration of Bonds and Book -Entry System. The Bonds shall be issued
only in registered form as to both principal and interest and recorded on the Bond Register. The
Bond Register shall contain the name and mailing address of the Owner of each Bond and the
principal amount and number of each of the Bonds held by each Owner.
On the date of issue of the Bonds, all Bonds maturing in the same maturity year shall be
issued in the form of a single certificate, which certificate shall be registered in the name of the
Custodian or its nominee, and delivered to the Custodian. The Custodian shall hold each such
Bond certificate in fully immobilized form for the benefit of the Beneficial Owners pursuant to
the Letter of Representations until the earliest to occur of either (1) the date of maturity of the
Bonds evidenced by such certificate, at which time the Custodian shall surrender such certificate
11
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
to the Bond Registrar for payment of the principal of and interest on such Bonds coming due on
such date, and the cancellation thereof; (2) the Book -Entry Termination Date; or (3) the date the
City determines to utilize a new Custodian for the Bonds, at which time the old Custodian shall
(provided the City is not then in default of any payment then due on the outstanding Bonds)
surrender the immobilized certificates to the Bond Registrar for transfer to the new Custodian
and cancellation as herein provided.
For so long as any outstanding Bonds are registered in the name of the Custodian or its
nominee and held by the Custodian in fully immobilized form as described in this Section 4, the
rights of the Beneficial Owners shall be evidenced solely by an electronic and/or manual entry
made from time to time on the records established and maintained by the Custodian in
accordance with the Letter of Representations, and no certificates evidencing such Bonds shall
be issued and registered in the name of any Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's
nominee.
The City may terminate the "book -entry" system of registering ownership of the Bonds at
any time (provided the City is not then in default of any payment then due on the outstanding
Bonds) by delivering to the Bond Registrar: (a) a written request that it issue and deliver Bond
certificates to each Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's nominee on the Book -Entry
Termination Date; (b) a list identifying the Beneficial Owners as to both name and address; and
(c) a supply of Bond certificates, if necessary for such purpose. Upon surrender to the Bond
Registrar of the immobilized certificates evidencing all of the then outstanding Bonds, the Bond
Registrar shall issue and deliver new certificates to each Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial
Owner's duly appointed agent, naming such Beneficial Owner or such Beneficial Owner's
12
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
nominee as the Owner thereof. Such certificates may be in any integral multiple of $5,000
within a single maturity. Following such issuance, the Owners of such Bonds may transfer and
exchange such Bonds in accordance with Section 10 hereof.
Neither the City nor the Bond Registrar shall have at any time any responsibility or
liability to any Beneficial Owner of Bonds or to any other person for any error, omission, action
or failure to act on the part of the Custodian with respect to payment, when due, to the Beneficial
Owner of the principal and interest on the Bonds, proper recording of beneficial ownership of
Bonds, proper transfers of such beneficial ownership, or any notices to Beneficial Owners or any
other matter pertaining to the Bonds.
Section 5. Payment of Bonds. Both principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be
payable in lawful money of the United States of America. Prior to the Book -Entry Termination
Date, the principal of and interest on the Bonds shall be paid by the Bond Registrar to the
Custodian as the Owner thereof, for the benefit of the Beneficial Owners thereof, in accordance
with the Letter of Representations.
From and after the Book -Entry Termination Date, interest on the Bonds shall be paid by
check or draft mailed on or before the interest payment date, to the persons identified as the
Owners on the fifteenth day of the month preceding the interest payment date at the addresses
shown for the Owners on the Bond Register, or, if requested in writing by an Owner of $100,000
or more in principal amount of Bonds at least ten days before an interest payment date, by wire
transfer on the interest payment date to an account within the United States. From and after the
Book -Entry Termination Date, principal of the Bonds shall be payable upon presentation and
13
fArenton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
surrender of the Bonds by the Owners at the principal corporate trust office of the Bond
Registrar.
The Bonds shall be payable solely out of the Bond Fund and the Reserve Fund and shall
be a valid claim of the Owners thereof only as against the Bond Fund, Reserve Fund and the
amount of Net Revenue pledged to those funds and shall not be general obligations of the City.
Section 6. No Redemption; Open Market Purchase of Bonds. The Bonds are not subject
to redemption prior to their stated maturity dates,
The City reserves the right to purchase any or all of the Bonds on the open market at any
time and at any price.
All Bonds purchased under this Section shall be canceled.
Section 7. Form of Bonds. The Bonds shall be typewritten, word processed, printed,
lithographed or multicopied on good bond paper in a form consistent with this ordinance and
Washington law.
Section 8. Execution of Bonds. The Bonds shall be executed on behalf of the City by the
facsimile or manual signatures of the Mayor and the City Clerk and shall have the seal of the
City impressed or a facsimile thereof imprinted thereon.
In the event any officer who shall have signed or whose facsimile signatures appear on
any of the Bonds shall cease to be such officer of the City before said Bonds shall have been
authenticated or delivered by the Bond Registrar or issued by the City, such Bonds may
nevertheless be authenticated, delivered and issued and, upon such authentication, delivery and
issuance, shall be as binding upon the City as though said person had not ceased to be such
officer. Any Bond may be signed and attested on behalf of the City by such persons who, at the
14
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
actual date of execution of such Bond shall be the proper officer of the City, although at the
original date of such Bond such persons were not such officers of the City.
Section 9 Authentication and Delivery of Bonds by Bond Registrar. The Bond Registrar
is authorized and directed, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds initially
issued or transferred or exchanged in accordance with the provisions of such Bonds and this
ordinance.
Only such Bonds as shall bear thereon a "Certificate of Authentication" manually
executed by an authorized representative of the Bond Registrar shall be valid or obligatory for
any purpose or entitled to the benefits of this ordinance. Such Certificate of Authentication shall
be conclusive evidence that the Bonds so authenticated have been duly executed, authenticated
and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits of this ordinance.
The Bond Registrar shall be responsible for its representations contained in the
Certificate of Authentication on the Bonds.
Section 10. Registration, Transfer and Exchange. The Bond Registrar shall keep, or
cause to be kept, at its principal corporate trust office, the Bond Register. The Bond Registrar is
authorized, on behalf of the City, to authenticate and deliver Bonds transferred or exchanged in
accordance with the provisions of the Bonds and this ordinance, to serve as the City's paying
agent for the Bonds and to carry out all of the Bond Registrar's powers and duties under this
ordinance and City Ordinance No. 3755 establishing a system of registration for the City's bonds
and obligations.
The City and the Bond Registrar, in its discretion, may deem and treat the Owner of each
Bond as the absolute owner thereof for all purposes, and neither the City nor the Bond Registrar
15
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
shall be affected by any notice to the contrary. Payment of any such Bond shall be made only as
described in Section 5 hereof, but such registration may be transferred as herein provided. All
such payments made as described in Section 5 hereof shall be valid and effectual to satisfy and
discharge the liability of the City upon such Bond to the extent of the amount or amounts so
paid.
The registered ownership of the Bonds may be transferred. Prior to the Book -Entry
Termination Date, the beneficial ownership of the Bonds may only be transferred on the records
established and maintained by the Custodian. On and after the Book -Entry Termination Date,
transfer of any Bond shall be valid only if it is surrendered at the principal corporate trust office
of either Bond Registrar, with the assignment form appearing on such Bond duly executed by, or
accompanied by a written instrument of transfer in form satisfactory to such Bond Registrar duly
executed by, the Owner or such Owner's duly authorized agent, in a manner satisfactory to such
Bond Registrar. Upon such surrender, the Bond Registrar shall cancel the surrendered Bond and
shall authenticate and deliver, without charge to the Owner or transferee therefor (other than any
governmental fees or taxes payable on account of such transfer), a new Bond or Bonds (at the
option of the new Owner), naming as Owner the person or persons listed as the assignee on the
assignment form appearing on the surrendered Bond, of the same maturity and interest rate, for
the same aggregate principal amount, and in any authorized denomination selected by the new
Owners, in exchange for such surrendered and cancelled Bond.
On and after the Book -Entry Termination Date, any Bond may be surrendered at the
principal corporate trust office of the Bond Registrar and exchanged, without charge, for an
equal aggregate principal amount of Bonds of the same maturity and interest rate, in any
16
f:\renton\w&s revretU3
ORDINANCE NO.
authorized denomination as selected by the Owner. The Bond Registrar shall not be obligated to
transfer or exchange any Bond during the fifteen days preceding any principal or interest
payment date.
The Bond Registrar may become the Owner of any Bond with the same rights it would
have if it were not the Bond Registrar and, to the extent permitted by law, may act as depository
for and permit any of its officers or directors to act as a member of, or in any other capacity with
respect to, any committee formed to protect the rights of the Owners of the Bonds.
The City covenants that, until all Bonds shall have been surrendered and cancelled, it
shall maintain a system of recording the ownership of each Bond that complies with the
provisions of the Code.
Section 11. Lost Stolen or Destroyed Bonds. If any Bond becomes mutilated, lost,
stolen or destroyed, the Bond Registrar may authenticate and deliver a new Bond of the same
interest rate and maturity and of like tenor and effect in substitution therefor, all in accordance
with applicable law. If such mutilated, lost, stolen or destroyed Bond has matured, the City may,
at its option, pay the same without the surrender thereof. However, no such substitution or
payment shall be made unless and until the applicant shall furnish (a) evidence satisfactory to the
Bond Registrar of the destruction or loss of the original Bond and of the ownership thereof, and
(b) such additional security, indemnity or evidence as may be required by or on behalf of the
City. No substitute Bond shall be furnished unless the applicant shall reimburse the City and the
Bond Registrar for their respective expenses in the furnishing thereof. Any such substitute Bond
so furnished shall be equally and proportionately entitled to the security of this ordinance with all
other Bonds issued hereunder.
17
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 12. ' Creation of Fund. There is hereby created in the City Treasury the 2003
Waterworks Revenue Bond Fund (the "Bond Fund")
Section 13. Deposits into Funds . So long as Bonds are outstanding against the Bond
Fund, the City shall:
(a) Set aside and pay into the Bond Fund out of Net Revenue a fixed amount,
without regard to any fixed proportion, namely, one day before each interest or principal
and interest payment date, an amount which, together with other money then on deposit
therein, shall be sufficient to meet the debt service on the Bonds required on the next
interest or principal and interest payment date; and
(b) Set aside and pay into the Reserve Fund out of the Net Revenue, in three
annual approximately equal deposits, any additional money necessary to bring the
amount deposited in the Reserve Fund attributable to the Bonds up to the amount equal to
the increase in the Reserve Requirement attributable to the Bonds.
The Reserve Fund may be accumulated from any other money which the City may have
available for that purpose in addition to or in lieu of using Net Revenue therefor.
Except for withdrawals therefrom as authorized herein, the Reserve Fund shall be
maintained at the Reserve Requirement at all times so long as any Parity Bonds are outstanding.
When the total amount in the Bond Fund shall equal the total amount of principal and interest for
all outstanding Bonds, no further payment need be made into the Bond Fund. Notwithstanding
the first sentence of this paragraph, the Reserve Requirement may be decreased for any issue of
Parity Bonds when and to the extent the City has provided for an Alternate Security or Reserve
Insurance.
If there shall be a deficiency in the Bond Fund to meet maturing installments of either
principal or interest, as the case may be, on the Bonds, that deficiency shall be made up from the
Reserve Fund by the withdrawal of cash therefrom for that purpose and after all cash has been
depleted, then by draws on the Alternate Security or Reserve Insurance for that purpose. Any
18
fArenton\w&s revreM
ORDINANCE NO.
deficiency created in the Reserve Fund by reason of any such withdrawal shall then be made up
from Net Revenue first available after making necessary provisions for the required payments
into the Bond Fund. Any money in the Reserve Fund in excess of the Reserve Requirement may
be withdrawn and deposited in any Parity Bond Fund and spent for the purpose of retiring Parity
Bonds or may be deposited in any other fund and spent for any other lawful Waterworks Utility
purpose.
The City may provide for the purchase, redemption or defeasance of Parity Bonds by the
use of money on deposit in the Bond Fund or the Reserve Fund as long as the money remaining
in those funds is sufficient to satisfy the required deposits in those funds for the remaining Parity
Bonds.
All money in the Bond Fund or Reserve Fund may be kept in cash or on deposit in the
official bank depository of the City or in any national bank or may be invested in any legal
investment for City funds. Interest on any of those investments or on that bank account shall be
deposited in the Reserve Fund until the total Reserve Requirement shall have been accumulated
therein, after which time the interest shall be deposited in any Parity Bond Fund.
Notwithstanding the provisions for the deposit or maintenance of earnings in the Bond
Fund or the Reserve Fund, any earnings which are subject to a federal tax or rebate requirement
may be withdrawn from the Bond Fund or the Reserve Fund for deposit into a separate fund or
account for that purpose.
If the City fails to set aside and pay into the Bond Fund or the Reserve Fund the amounts
set forth above, the Owner of any of the outstanding Bonds may bring an action against the City
to compel that setting aside and payment.
19
fArenton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 14. Flow of Funds. Funds in the Waterworks Utility Fund (other than in any
bond redemption or federal rebate account) shall be used in the following order of priority:
(a) To pay Maintenance and Operation Expense;
(b) To pay the interest on the Parity Bonds;
(c) To pay the principal of the Parity Bonds;
(d) To make all payments required to be made into any sinking fund or bond
redemption fund hereafter created for the payment of Future Parity Bonds which
are Term Bonds;
(e) To make all payments required to be made into the Reserve Fund;
(f) To make all payments required to be made into any revenue bond redemption
fund or warrant redemption fund and debt service account or reserve account
created to pay and secure the payment of the principal of and interest on any
revenue bonds or revenue warrants of the City having a lien upon Gross Revenue
junior and inferior to the lien thereon for the payment of the principal of and
interest on the Parity Bonds; and
(g) To retire by optional redemption or purchase in the open market any outstanding
revenue bonds or revenue warrants of the City, to make necessary additions,
betterments, improvements and repairs to or extensions and replacements of the
Waterworks Utility, to make deposits into the Rate Stabilization Fund, or for any
other lawful City purpose.
Section 15. 'Pledge of Revenue and Lien Position. The Net Revenue is pledged to the
payment of the Parity Bonds, and the Parity Bonds shall constitute a lien and charge upon such
Net Revenue prior and superior to any other charge whatsoever.
Section 16. Findings Regarding Sufficiency of Revenue. In the judgment of the City
Council, Gross Revenue and benefits to be derived from the operation and maintenance of the
Waterworks Utility, at the rates to be charged for water, sanitary sewage disposal service and
storm and surface water drainage service in the entire utility, will be more than sufficient to meet
all Maintenance and Operation Expense (and cost of maintenance and operation of the
20
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
Waterworks Utility as that term is used in RCW 35.92.100) and the debt service requirements of
the outstanding Parity Bonds and to permit the setting aside in the Bond Fund and the Reserve
Fund, out of the revenue of the entire utility, of amounts sufficient to pay the interest on the
Bonds as that interest becomes payable and to pay and redeem all of the Bonds at maturity. The
City Council further declares that in creating the Bond Fund and in fixing the amounts to be paid
into the Bond Fund and the Reserve Fund, as aforesaid, it has exercised due regard for the
Maintenance and Operation Expense (and costs of maintenance and operation as used in RCW
35.92.100) and the debt service requirements of the currently outstanding Parity Bonds, and the
City has not bound and obligated itself to set aside and pay into the Bond Fund and the Reserve
Fund, a greater amount or proportion of the revenue of that utility than in the judgment of the
City Council will be available over and above Maintenance and Operation Expense (and such
costs of maintenance and operation of the Waterworks Utility as that term is used in RCW
35.92.100) and debt service requirements of the currently outstanding Parity Bonds and that no
portion of the Gross Revenue has been previously pledged for any unref ended indebtedness
other than the payment of the currently outstanding Parity Bonds.
Section 17. Covenants. The City covenants and agrees with the Owner of each Bond at
any time outstanding as follows:
(a) It will establish, maintain and collect rates and charges for all services and
facilities provided by the Waterworks Utility which will be fair and nondiscriminatory,
and will adjust those rates and charges from time to time so that:
(1) Gross Revenue will at all times be sufficient to (A ) pay all
Maintenance and Operation Expense on a current basis, (B) pay when due all
amounts that the City is obligated to pay into the Reserve Fund and any Parity
Bond Funds and (C) pay all taxes, assessments or other governmental charges
lawfully imposed upon the Waterworks Utility or other revenue therefrom or
21
fArenton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
payments in lieu thereof and any and all other amounts which the City may now
or hereafter become obligated to pay from Gross Revenue by law or contract; and
(2) Net Revenue in each calendar year will be at least equal to the
Coverage Requirement.
(b) It will at all times maintain and keep the Waterworks Utility in good
repair, working order and condition and also will at all times operate such Utility and the
business in connection therewith in an efficient manner and at a reasonable cost.
(c) It will not sell or otherwise dispose of the Waterworks Utility in its
entirety unless, simultaneously with such sale or other disposition, all Parity Bonds are
defeased pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance.
It will not sell, lease, mortgage or in any manner encumber or otherwise dispose
of any part of the Waterworks Utility (other than timber), including all additions and
improvements thereto and extensions thereof at any time made, that are used, useful or
material in the operation of the Waterworks Utility, unless provision is made for the
replacement thereof or for payment into the Bond Fund of the greatest of the following:
(1) An amount which will be in the same proportion to the net amount
of any Parity Bonds then outstanding (defined as the total amount of those bonds
less the amount of cash and investments in the Reserve Fund and any Parity Bond
Funds) that Gross Revenue from the portion of the Waterworks Utility sold or
disposed of for the preceding year bears to the total Gross Revenue for that
period;
(2) An amount which will be in the same proportion to the net amount
of any Parity Bonds then outstanding (as defined above) that the Net Revenue
from the portion of the Waterworks Utility sold or disposed of for the preceding
year bears to the total Net Revenue for that period; or
(3) An amount which will be in the same proportion to the net amount
of any Parity Bonds then outstanding (as defined above) that the depreciated cost
value of the facilities sold or disposed of bears to the depreciated cost value of the
entire Waterworks Utility immediately prior to such sale or disposition.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this subsection, (1) the City in its
discretion may sell or otherwise dispose of any of the works, plant, properties or facilities
of the Waterworks Utility or any real or personal property comprising a part of the same
which shall have become unserviceable, inadequate, obsolete or unfit to be used in the
operation of the Waterworks Utility, or no longer necessary, material to or useful to the
operation of the Waterworks Utility, without making any deposit into the Bond Fund, and
(2) the City may transfer the Waterworks Utility to another municipal corporation so long
22
f\renton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
as Net Revenue of the portion of the Waterworks Utility so transferred is used for
payment of debt service on the Parity Bonds prior to any other purpose. In no event shall
such proceeds be treated as Gross Revenue for purposes of this ordinance.
(d) It will keep proper books, records and accounts with respect to the
operations, income and expenditures of the Waterworks Utility in accordance with proper
accounting procedures and any applicable rules and regulations prescribed by the State.
It will prepare annual financial and operating statements within 270 days of the close of
each fiscal year showing in reasonable detail the financial condition of the Waterworks
Utility as of the close of the previous year, and the income and expenses for such year,
including the amounts paid into the Bond Fund and Reserve Fund and into any and all
special funds or accounts created pursuant to this ordinance, the status of all funds and
accounts as of the end of such year, and the amounts expended for maintenance,
renewals, replacements and capital additions to the Waterworks Utility. Such statements
shall be sent to the Owner of any Parity Bonds upon written request therefor being made
to the City.
(e) Except to aid the poor or infirm, to provide for resource conservation or to
provide for the proper handling of hazardous materials, it will not furnish or supply or
permit the furnishing or supplying of any service or facility in connection with the
operation of the Waterworks Utility free of charge to any person, firm or corporation,
public or private, other than the City, so long as any Parity Bonds are outstanding. On at
least an annual basis, it will determine all accounts that are delinquent and will take all
necessary action to enforce payment of such accounts against those property owners
whose accounts are delinquent.
(f) It at all times will carry fire and extended coverage and such other forms
of insurance, including public liability and property damage insurance, with responsible
insurers and with policies payable to or on behalf of the City and any additional insureds
on such of the buildings, equipment, works, plants, facilities and properties of the
Waterworks Utility, and against such claims for damages, as are ordinarily carried by
municipal or privately owned utilities engaged in the operation of like systems, or will
implement and maintain a self-insurance or an insurance pool program with reserves
adequate, in the reasonable judgment of the City, to protect the Waterworks Utility and
the Owners of the Parity Bonds against loss.
(g) It will pay all Maintenance and Operation Expense and the debt service
requirements for the outstanding Parity Bonds, and otherwise meet the obligations of the
City as herein set forth.
(h) It will take all actions necessary to prevent interest on the Bonds from
being included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, and it will neither take
any action nor make or permit any use of proceeds of the Bonds or other funds of the City
treated as proceeds of the Bonds at any time during the term of the Bonds which will
23
fArenton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
cause interest on the Bonds to be included in gross income for federal income tax
purposes. It will, to the extent arbitrage rebate requirements of Section 148 of the Code
are applicable to the Bonds, take all action necessary to comply (or to be treated as
having complied) with those requirements in connection with the Bonds, including the
calculation and payment of any penalties that the City has elected to pay as an alternative
to calculating rebatable arbitrage, and the payment of any other penalties if required
under Section 148 of the Code to prevent interest on the Bonds from being included in
gross income for federal income tax purposes.
The City certifies that it has not been notified of any listing or proposed listing by the
Internal Revenue Service to the effect that it is a bond issuer whose arbitrage certifications may
not be relied upon.
Section 18. No Private Activity Bonds. The City covenants that it will take no actions
and will make no use of the proceeds of the Bonds or any other funds held under this ordinance
which would cause any Bond to be treated as a "private activity bond" (as defined in Section
141(b) of the Code) subject to treatment under said Section 141(b) as an obligation not described
in Section 103(a) of the Code, unless the tax exemption thereof is not affected.
Section 19. Defeasance of the Bonds. The City may issue refunding bonds pursuant to
State law or use money available from any other lawful source to pay when due the principal of
and interest on the Bonds, or any portion thereof included in a refunding or defeasance plan, and
to redeem and retire, refund or defease all such then -outstanding Bonds (hereinafter collectively
called the "defeased Bonds") and to pay the costs of the refunding or defeasance. If money
and/or direct obligations of the United States of America maturing at a time or times and bearing
interest in amounts (together with money, if necessary) sufficient to redeem and retire, refund or
decrease the defeased Bonds in accordance with their terms are set aside in a special trust fund or
escrow account irrevocably pledged to that redemption, retirement or defeasance of defeased
Bonds (hereinafter called the "trust account'), then all right and interest of the Owners of the
24
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
defeased Bonds in the covenants of this ordinance, in Gross Revenue and in funds and accounts
obligated to the payment of the defeased Bonds, other than the right to receive the funds so set
aside and pledged, shall cease and become void. The owners of defeased Bonds shall have the
right to receive payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from the trust
account and, if the funds in the trust account are not available for such payment, shall have the
residual right to receive payment of the principal of and interest on the defeased Bonds from
Gross Revenue without any priority of lien or charge against such revenue or covenants with
respect thereto except to be paid therefrom.
After the establishing and full funding of the trust account, the City may then apply any
money in any other fund or account established for the payment or redemption of the defeased
Bonds to any lawful purposes as it shall determine, subject only to the rights, if any, of the
owners of any other Parity Bonds then outstanding.
If the refunding plan provides that the defeased Bonds or the refunding bonds to be
issued be secured by cash and/or direct obligations of the United States of America or other legal
investments pending the prior redemption of the defeased Bonds and if such refunding plan also
provides that certain cash and/or direct obligations of the Untied States of America or other legal
investments are pledged irrevocably for the prior redemption of the defeased Bonds included in
that refunding plan, then only the debt service on the Bonds which are not defeased Bonds and
the refunding bonds, the payment of which is not so secured by the refunding plan, shall be
included in the computation of coverage for determining compliance with the rate covenants.
25
f:\renton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 20. Provision for Future Parity Bonds. The City reserves the right to issue
Future Parity Bonds if the following conditions are met and complied with at the time of
issuance of those additional bonds:
(a) There shall be no deficiency in any Parity Bond Fund.
(b) The ordinance providing for the issuance of such Future Parity Bonds
shall provide for the payment of the principal thereof and interest thereon out of a Parity
Bond Fund.
(c) The ordinance providing for the issuance of such Future Parity Bonds
shall provide for the deposit into the Reserve Fund from the proceeds of those Future
Parity Bonds of (1) an amount equal to the increase in the Reserve Requirement
attributable to those Parity Bonds or (2) Reserve Insurance or Alternate Security or an
amount plus Reserve Insurance or Alternate Security equal to the increase in the Reserve
Requirement attributable to those Future Parity Bonds. For federal income tax purposes,
at the discretion of the City, to the extent that the Reserve Requirement cannot be funded
from Future Parity Bond proceeds, the City shall provide for deposit into the Reserve
Fund other legally available money from Net Revenue or Reserve Insurance or Alternate
Security within three years from the date of issuance of the Future Parity Bonds in three
approximately equal annual payments.
(d) The ordinance authorizing the issuance of such Future Parity Bonds shall
provide for the payment of mandatory redemption or sinking fund requirements into the
applicable Parity Bond Fund for any Term Bonds to be issued and for regular payments
to be made for the payment of the principal of such Term Bonds on or before their
maturity, or, as an alternative, the mandatory redemption of those Term Bonds prior to
their maturity date from money in the applicable Parity Bond Fund.
(e) There shall be on file with the City either:
(1) a certificate of the City Finance Director demonstrating that during
any 12 consecutive calendar months out of the immediately preceding 36 calendar
months Net Revenue, without regard to deposits into or withdrawals from the
Rate Stabilization Fund, is equal to at least the Coverage Requirement for all
Parity Bonds plus the Future Parity Bonds proposed to be issued; or
(2) a certificate of a Professional Utility Consultant that in such
consultant's opinion Revenue for any 12 consecutive calendar months, without
regard to deposits into or withdrawals from the Rate Stabilization Fund, shall be
equal to the Coverage Requirement for each year thereafter. The certificate, in
26
fArenton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
estimating Net Revenue available for debt services, may adjust Net Revenue to
reflect:
(A) Any changes in rates in effect and being charged or
expressly committed by ordinance to be made in the future;
(B) Income derived from customers of the Waterworks Utility
who have become customers during the 12 consecutive month period or
thereafter adjusted to reflect one year's Net Revenue from those
customers;
(C) Income from any customers to be connected to the
Waterworks Utility who have paid the required connection charges;
(D) The Professional Utility Consultant's estimate of the Net
Revenue to be derived from customers anticipated to connect for whom
building permits have been issued;
(E) Income received or to be received which is derived from
any person, firm corporation or municipal corporation under any executed
contract for water, sewage disposal or other utility service, which revenue
was not included in the historical Net Revenue;
(F) The Professional Utility Consultant's estimate of the Net
Revenue to be derived from customers with existing homes or buildings
which will be required to connect to any additions to and improvements
and extensions of the Waterworks Utility constructed and to be paid for
out of the proceeds of the sale of the additional Future Parity Bonds or
other additions to and improvements and extensions of the Waterworks
Utility when such additions, improvements and extensions are not
completed; and
(G) Any increases or decrease in Net Revenue as a result of any
actual or reasonably anticipated changes in Maintenance and Operation
Expense subsequent to the 12-month period.
If Future Parity Bonds proposed to be so issued are for the sole purpose of
refunding outstanding bonds payable from any Parity Bond Fund, such certification of
coverage shall not be required if the amount required for the payment of the principal and
interest in each year for the refunding bonds is not increased more than $5,000 over the
amount for that same year required for the bonds or the portion of that bond issue to be
refunded thereby and if the maturities of such refunding bonds are not extended beyond
the maturities of the bonds to be refunded thereby.
27
f Venton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
Nothing contained herein shall prevent the City from issuing Future Parity Bonds to
refund maturing Bonds or Future Parity Bonds then outstanding, money for the payment of
which is not otherwise available.
Nothing contained herein shall prevent the City from issuing revenue bonds that are a
charge upon Gross Revenue subordinate to the payments required to be made therefrom into any
Parity Bond Fund.
Section 22. Approval of Purchase Agreement. The Purchaser has presented the Purchase
Agreement to the City pursuant to which the Purchaser has offered to purchase the Bonds. The
City Council finds that entering into the Purchase Agreement is in the best interests of the City,
and therefore accepts the offer contained in the Purchase Agreement and authorizes and directs
the execution of the Purchase Agreement on behalf of the City by City officials, and delivery of
the same to the Purchaser.
The Bonds will be delivered to the Purchaser in accordance with the Purchase Agreement
with a copy of the approving legal opinion of Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC, bond counsel,
Seattle, Washington, relative to the issuance of the Bonds, attached to each Bond. Bond counsel
has not been engaged to review or express any opinion concerning the completeness or accuracy
of the official statement or other disclosure documentation used in connection with the offer or
sale of the Bonds by any person, and bond counsel's opinion shall so state. Bond counsel has not
been retained to monitor, and shall not be responsible for monitoring, the City's compliance with
any federal law or regulations to maintain the tax-exempt status of the interest on the Bonds.
Section 23. Bond Insurance. The City is authorized to purchase from the Bond Insurer
the Bond Insurance Policy insuring the prompt payment of the principal of and interest on the
28
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
Bonds and agrees to the conditions for obtaining that policy, including the payment of the
premium therefor. The City Council authorizes and directs the execution of the commitment for
the Bond Insurance Policy on behalf of the City by City officials, including, but not limited to
the City Finance Director, and delivery of the same to the Bond Insurer. Any notice required to
be given to any party pursuant to this ordinance shall also be provided to the Bond Insurer.
Notices shall be sent to the following address: MBIA Insurance Corporation, 113 King Street,
Armonk, New York 10504, Attention: Insured Portfolio Management.
Section 24. Delivery of Bonds; Temporary Bonds. The proper City officials, including,
but not limited to, the City Finance Director, are authorized and directed (a) to execute all
documents necessary to complete the issuance and delivery of the Bonds to the Purchaser,
including, but not limited to, the final official statement pertaining to the Bonds; and (b) to do
everything necessary for (1) the preparation and delivery of a transcript of proceedings
pertaining to the Bonds, and (2) the preparation, execution and delivery of definitive Bonds to
the Purchaser, each without unreasonable delay.
If definitive Bonds are not ready for delivery by the date of Closing agreed to by the City
and the Purchaser, the City, upon the approval of the Purchaser, may cause to be issued and
delivered to the Purchaser one or more temporary Bonds with appropriate omissions, changes
and additions. Any temporary Bonds shall be entitled and subject to the same benefits and
provisions of this ordinance with respect to the payment, security and obligation thereof as
definitive Bonds authorized hereby. Such temporary Bond or Bonds shall be exchangeable
without cost to the Owner thereof for definitive Bonds when the latter are ready for delivery.
29
f Venton\w&s revrefU3
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 25. Call of 1993 Bonds for Redemption. The City hereby ratifies the call for
redemption on October 1, 2003 of the 1993 Bonds that are subject to optional redemption, at a
redemption price of 101 % of the principal amount thereof plus accrued interest. Such call for
redemption shall become irrevocable upon delivery of the Bonds at Closing.
Section 26. Acquisition of Escrow Obligations. The proper City officials, including, but
not limited to, the City Finance Director shall, at or prior to Closing, make appropriate
arrangements for the payment for and delivery of any Escrow Obligations which are to be
purchased in the open market pursuant to the Refunding Plan; and shall, prior to Closing, deliver
or cause to be delivered to the Federal Reserve Bank in Seattle, Washington, subscriptions for.
any Escrow Obligations which are to be acquired from the United States Bureau of Public Debt
pursuant to the Refunding Plan. The maturing principal of and the interest on such Escrow
Obligations, together with the Initial Cash to be provided to the Escrow Trustee pursuant to the
Refunding Plan, shall be sufficient to pay all of the principal of and interest to become due on the
1993 Bonds from Closing to and including October 1, 2003, when due, and to redeem on said
date, all of the remaining outstanding 1993 Bonds at a redemption price of 101 % of the principal
amount thereof, and to pay all of the principal of and interest to become due on the 1994 Bonds
from Closing to and including November 1, 2005, the final maturity date of the outstanding 1994
Bonds.
The Escrow Trustee shall designate in any such subscriptions that all the principal of and
interest on the Escrow Obligations subscribed for with the United States Bureau of Public Debt
shall be payable to the Escrow Trustee. Such subscription may be amended as permitted by
federal law.
30
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
Section 27. Verification of Sufficiency of Escrow. The proper City officials, including,
but not limited to, the City Finance Director are authorized and directed to obtain, prior to
Closing, independent verification from a firm of independent certified public accountants that,
among other things, the cash flow scheduled to be received from the Escrow Obligations,
together with any uninvested initial cash, shall be sufficient to make the payments described in
Section 22 hereof. At Closing, if there has been any change in Escrow Obligations or cash
deposited with the Escrow Trustee under this ordinance and the Escrow Agreement, the City
Finance Director shall cause the sufficiency of the Escrow Fund (as defined in the Escrow
Agreement) to be verified in such manner as she shall deem necessary.
Section 28. Escrow Agreement. The Escrow Agreement is hereby approved. The City
Finance Director is authorized and directed to execute and to deliver said Escrow Agreement, on
behalf of the City, to the Escrow Trustee on or before Closing, with such changes as the City
Finance Director deems to be in the best interests of the City; and such execution and delivery of
the Escrow Agreement shall evidence irrevocably the approval of the executed Escrow
Agreement by the City.
Section 29. Application of Bond Proceeds. The accrued interest and the rounding
amount, if any, received by the City at Closing shall be deposited into the Bond Fund and shall
be applied to the payment of interest first coming due on the Bonds.
The remaining proceeds of the sale of the Bonds, less the underwriter's discount and the
bond insurance premium to be paid by the Purchaser on behalf of the City, plus the net original
issue premium, together with such other funds of the City as are identified in the Refunding Plan,
31
f:\renton\w&s revrefD3
ORDINANCE NO.
shall be paid by the City to the Escrow Trustee at Closing, to be applied as set forth in the
Escrow Agreement.
Section 30. Undertaking to Provide Continuing Disclosure. This section constitutes the
City's written undertaking for the benefit of the Owners and Beneficial Owners of the Bonds
required by subsection (b)(5)(i) of the Rule.
The City hereby agrees to provide or cause to be provided to each then existing NRMSIR
and to the SID, if one is created, the following annual financial information and operating data
(collectively, the "Annual Financial Information") for each prior fiscal year, commencing with
the calendar year ending December 31, 2003, on or before the last day of the seventh month
following the end of such prior fiscal year:
(a) Annual financial statements prepared in accordance with the generally accepted
accounting principles applicable to governmental units, as such principles may be changed from
time to time and as permitted by State law; which statements will not be audited, except that if
and when audited financial statements are otherwise prepared and available to the City, they will -
be provided (the "Annual Financial Statements");
(b) A statement of authorized, issued and outstanding bonded debt secured by the
Net Revenue;
(c) Debt service coverage ratios;
(d) General customer statistics for the Waterworks Utility; and
(e) A narrative explanation of the reasons for any amendments to this Section 30
made during the previous fiscal year and the impact of such amendments on the Annual
Financial Information being provided.
32
f \renton\w&s revrefD3
r
ORDINANCE NO.
In its provision of such financial information and operating data, the City may cross-
reference to any "final official statement" (as defined in the Rule) available from the MSRB or
any other documents theretofore provided to each then existing NRMSIR or the SID, if one is
created.
If not submitted as part of the Annual Financial Information, then when and if available,
the City shall provide its Annual Financial Statements, which shall have been audited by such
auditor as shall be then required or permitted by the State law, to each then existing NRMSIR
and to the SID, if one is created.
The City further agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to the
SID, if one is created, and to either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR, notice of any of
the following events with respect to the Bonds, if material:
1. Principal and interest payment delinquencies;
2. Non-payment related defaults;
3. Unscheduled draws on debt service reserves reflecting financial difficulties;
4. Unscheduled draws on credit enhancements reflecting financial difficulties;
5. Substitution of credit or liquidity providers, or their failure to perform;
6. Adverse tax opinions or events affecting the tax-exempt status of the Bonds;
7. Modifications to rights of the Owners of the Bonds;
8. Optional redemptions of the Bonds;
9. Defeasances of the Bonds;
10. Release, substitution or sale of property securing repayment of the Bonds; and
11. Rating changes.
33
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
The City also agrees to provide or cause to be provided, in a timely manner, to the SID, if
one is created, and to either the MSRB or each then existing NRMSIR, notice of its failure to
provide the Annual Financial Information for the prior fiscal year on or before the last day of the
seventh month following the end of such prior fiscal year.
After the issuance of the Bonds, so long as the interests of the Owners or Beneficial
Owners of the Bonds will not be materially impaired thereby, as determined by a party
unaffiliated with the City (including, without limitation, a trustee for the Owners, nationally
recognized bond counsel or other counsel familiar with the federal securities law), or pursuant to
a favorable "no -action letter" issued by the SEC, this Section 30 may only be amended in
connection with any change in legal requirements, change in law, or change in the identity,
nature or status of the obligated person, or type of business conducted, and only in such a manner
that the undertaking of the City, as so amended, would have complied with the requirements of
the Rule at the time of the primary offering, after taking into account any amendments or
interpretations of the Rule, as well as any change in circumstances.
The City's obligations to provide Annual Financial Information and notices of certain
events shall terminate without amendment upon the defeasance, prior redemption or payment in
full of all of the then outstanding Bonds. This Section 30 or any provision hereof, shall be null
and void if the City (i) obtains an opinion of nationally recognized bond counsel or other counsel
familiar with the federal securities laws to the effect that those portions of the Rule which require
this Section 30 or any such provision are invalid, have been repealed retroactively or otherwise
do not apply to the Bonds; and (ii) notifies and provides the SID, if any, and either the MSRB or
each then existing NRMSIR with copies of such opinion.
34
t\renton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
The right of each Owner or Beneficial Owner of Bonds to enforce the provisions of this
Section 30 shall be limited to the right to obtain specific enforcement of the City's obligations
under this Section 30, and any failure by the City to comply with the provisions of this
undertaking shall not be a default with respect to the Bonds under this ordinance.
The City Finance Director is authorized and directed to take such further action on behalf
of the City as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to carry out the requirements of this
Section 30.
Section 31. Preliminary Official Statement Deemed Final. The City Council has been
provided with copies of a preliminary official statement dated September 10, 2003 (the
"Preliminary Official Statement"), prepared in connection with the sale of the Bonds. For the
sole purpose of the Bond purchaser's compliance with paragraph (b) (1) of the Rule, the City
"deems final" that Preliminary Official Statement as of its date, except for the omission of
information as to offering prices, interest rates, selling compensation, aggregate principal
amount, principal amount per maturity, maturity dates, options of redemption, delivery dates,
ratings and other terms of the Bonds dependent on such matters.
Section 32. Contract; Savings Clause. The covenants contained in this ordinance and in
the Bonds shall constitute a contract between the City and the Owner of each and every Bond. If
any one or more of the covenants or agreements provided in this ordinance to be performed on
the part of the City shall be declared by any court of competent jurisdiction and after final appeal
(if any appeal be taken) to be contrary to law, then such covenant or covenants, agreement or
agreements, shall be null and void and shall be deemed separable from the remaining covenants
35
fArenton\w&s revref03
ORDINANCE NO.
and agreements in this ordinance and shall in no way affect the validity of the other provisions of
this ordinance or of the Bonds.
Section 33. Effective Date of Ordinance. This ordinance shall be effective upon its
passage, approval and five days after publication.
PASSED by the City Council this day of September, 2003.
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this
Approved as to Form:
Bond Counsel
Date of Publication: (Summary)
Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
day of September, 2003.
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
36
f\renton\w&s revref03
EXHIBIT A
FORM OF
ESCROW AGREEMENT
This ESCROW AGREEMENT, dated as of September 30, 2003, is made by and between
the CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON (the "City"), duly organized and existing pursuant to
the laws of the State of Washington, and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as escrow
trustee hereunder (the "Escrow Trustee").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City now has outstanding $8,110,000 principal amount of its Water and
Sewer Refunding and Improvement Revenue Bonds, 1993 (the "1993 Bonds") and $420,000
principal amount of its Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994 (the "1994 Bonds" and, together
with the 1993 Bonds, the "Refunded Bonds"); and
WHEREAS, after due consideration, it appears to the City Council of the City (the "City
Council") that refunding all of the outstanding Refunded Bonds by the issuance of refunding
bonds of the City will provide a debt service savings to the City and a modification of the
covenants and other terms of the Parity Bonds; and
WHEREAS, by Ordinance No. (the "Bond Ordinance"), the City has duly and
validly authorized the issuance, sale and delivery of its $8,035,000 Water and Sewer Revenue
Refunding Bonds, 2003 (the "Bonds"), and the delivery of a portion of the net principal proceeds
of the Bonds to the Escrow Trustee, the purchase of the noncallable "Government Obligations"
(as defined in Chapter 39.53 RCW) listed in Schedule 1 hereto (the "Escrow Obligations"), and
the execution and delivery of this Escrow Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the Escrow Trustee has duly and validly accepted the trust created by this
Escrow Agreement and the performance of its obligations hereunder; and-- --,m -. ,. } v - -
WHEREAS, the Refunding Plan for the Refunded Bonds (the "Refunding Plan") will be
accomplished pursuant to this Escrow Agreement (including the Schedules hereto), and shall
consist of the following:
(a) The payment to the Escrow Trustee by D.A. Davidson & Co., the Purchaser of the
Bonds (the "Purchaser"), on behalf of the City, of the sum of $8,059,664.92, derived solely from
the net proceeds of the Bonds, and the payment to the Escrow Trustee by the City of the sum of
$825,478.23, derived from money on deposit in the Principal and Interest Account in the 1994
Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Water and Sewer Revenue Parity
Bond Fund (the "Parity Bond Fund") in the amount of $179,130.83 and from money on deposit
in the Principal and Interest Account in the 1993 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption
Account in the Parity Bond Fund in the amount of $646,347.40.
(b) The purchase by the Escrow Trustee of the Escrow Obligations listed in
Schedule 1 attached hereto and made a part hereof by this reference, with a portion of the money
delivered to the Escrow Trustee as described in clause (a) above;
(c) The delivery of a report (the "Escrow Verification") of Causey Demgen & Moore
Inc., independent certified public accountants, attached as Schedule 2 hereto and made a part
hereof by this reference, verifying the mathematical accuracy of the computations (which
computations shall be attached to said letter) of the yield on the Bonds and the Escrow Fund, and
the computations showing that the Initial Cash and the maturing principal of and interest on the
Escrow Obligation's will provide sufficient money (assuming that all the principal of and the
interest on the Escrow Obligations is paid on the due dates thereof) to pay the following
(collectively, the "Escrow Payments"):
(1) The principal of and interest coming due on the 1993 Bonds up to and
including October 1, 2003;
(2) The redemption price equal to 101 % of the principal amount of the 1993
Bonds called for redemption on that date; and
(3) The principal of and interest coming due on the 1994 Bonds up to and
including November 1, 2004;
(d) The receipt by the Escrow Trustee of the maturing installments of principal of and
interest on the Escrow Obligations;
(e) The Escrow Trustee's payment from time to time to the fiscal agencies of the
State of Washington (collectively, the "Fiscal Agencies") of money sufficient to make the
Escrow Payments, when due;
(f) The payment by the Escrow Trustee of the costs of issuing the Bonds, as
described on Schedule 3 attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, for
the benefit of the registered owners of the Refunded Bonds, the parties hereto covenant as
follows:
Section 1. Definitions in Bond Ordinance Applicable. Unless the context otherwise
requires, the terms defined in the Bond Ordinance and in the recitals and the succeeding sections
of this Escrow Agreement shall, for all purposes of this Escrow Agreement (including the
recitals hereto), be incorporated herein and made a part hereof by this reference, and shall have
the meanings specified in such places, such definitions to be equally applicable to both the
singular and plural forms of any of the terms defined.
Section 2. Creation of Escrow Fund. The Escrow Trustee shall create a trust fund in
escrow (the "Escrow Fund") under this Escrow Agreement into which shall be irrevocably
deposited the Escrow Obligations, the Initial Cash, any Substitute Obligations and any other
funds provided to the Escrow Trustee hereunder for use in the refunding of the Refunded Bonds.
2
fArenton\w&s revref03
Section 3. Delivery of Bond Proceeds to Escrow Trustee. On September 30, 2003 (the
"Date of Closing"), the City shall cause the Purchaser to pay to the Escrow Trustee the sum of
$8,059,664.92, derived solely from the net proceeds of the Bonds and shall pay to the Escrow
Trustee the sum of $825,478.23, derived from money on deposit in the Principal and Interest
Account in the 1994 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Parity Bond
Fund in the amount of $179,130.83 and from money on deposit in the Principal and Interest
Account in the 1993 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Parity Bond
Fund in the amount of $646,347.00. Execution of this Escrow Agreement by the Escrow Trustee
shall constitute written acknowledgment by the Escrow Trustee of its receipt of said sums.
Section 4. Application of Net Proceeds of the Bonds. On the Date of Closing, the
Escrow Trustee shall:
(a) Apply the sum of $442,426.00, derived from net proceeds of the Bonds in the
amount of $263,266.00 and from money on deposit in the Principal and Interest Account in the
1994 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Parity Bond Fund in the
amount of $179,130.00, to pay the purchase price of the Escrow Obligations in the principal
amounts, with the dates of maturities, at the prices and at the interest rates set forth in Schedule 1
hereto. Upon receipt of the Escrow Obligations, the Escrow Trustee shall deliver to the City and
to Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC ("Bond Counsel") copies of the documents evidencing the
purchase of and payment for the Escrow Obligations; provided, that the City reserves the right to
substitute for a temporary period until receipt of the Escrow Obligations, prior to the Date of
Closing, other noncallable direct United States obligations or cash for any of the Escrow
Obligations if, in the opinion of Bond Counsel, the interest on the Bonds will remain excluded
from gross income for federal income tax purposes under Section 103 of the Internal Revenue
Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and such substitution shall not impair the timely.
payment of the amounts required to be paid under the Refunding Plan, which opinion will be
accompanied by a verification of such timely payments from a nationally recognized firm of
independent certified public accountants;
(b) Hold the sum of $8,404,217.15 (the "Initial Cash"), derived from net proceeds of
the Bonds in the amount of $7,757,868.92, money on deposit in the Principal and Interest
Account in the 1994 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Parity Bond
Fund in the amount of $0.83, and money on deposit in the Principal and Interest Account in the
1993 Water and Sewer Revenue Bond Redemption Account in the Parity Bond Fund in the
amount of $646,347.40, uninvested in the form of United States currency until application of the
same to meet the Escrow Payments; and
(c) Apply the sum of $38,500.00, derived solely from the net proceeds of the Bonds,
to the payment of the costs of issuing the Bonds listed on Schedule 3 hereto.
Section 5. Sufficiency of Escrow Obligations. On the basis of the Escrow Verification,
the City represents that the Escrow Obligations, and the maturing principal thereof and the
interest thereon, if paid when due, together with the Initial Cash, shall be sufficient to make the
Escrow Payments, when due.
3
f:\renton\w&s revref03
Section 6. Collection of Proceeds of Obligations and Application of Such Proceeds and
Money. The Escrow Trustee shall present for payment, and shall collect and receive, on the due
dates thereof, the maturing installments of principal of and the interest on the Escrow
Obligations and any Substitute Obligations (hereinafter defined). From such proceeds and other
money in the Escrow Fund, the Escrow Trustee shall, to the extent sufficient funds are in its
possession, make timely payment to the Fiscal Agencies of the amounts necessary to make the
Escrow Payments, when due. Said payments shall be made by check, wire transfer or such other
method of transfer of funds as shall be mutually agreed from time to time by the Escrow Trustee
and the Fiscal Agencies.
Section 7. All Securities and Money and Proceeds Thereof Held in Trust. The City
hereby irrevocably conveys, transfers and assigns to the Escrow Trustee, in trust, the Escrow
Obligations and the Substitute Obligations, if any, the proceeds thereof and thereon, and the
Initial Cash, and any substitutions or reinvestments thereof made pursuant to Sections 9 and 10
hereof; and the Escrow Trustee hereby irrevocably agrees to hold the same, together with any
other money which the Escrow Trustee may receive pursuant to this Escrow Agreement, in the
Escrow Fund, in trust and separate from all other funds and investments held by the Escrow
Trustee, solely for the purpose of making the Escrow Payments and payments described in
Sections 4, 11 and 14 hereof. The Escrow Trustee shall not sell, transfer, assign or hypothecate
any portion of the Escrow Fund except pursuant to Sections 9, 10, 11 and 14 hereof.
Section 8. Reports and Notice of Insufficiency. For as long as any part of the principal
of or the interest on the Refunded Bonds has not been paid, within 35 business days following
the date scheduled for payment of any debt service thereon, the Escrow Trustee shall render
reports to the City setting forth the activity since the date of the last debt service payment
concerning the Escrow Obligations or any Substitute Obligations, the maturation of such Escrow
Obligations or Substitute Obligations and amounts received by the Escrow Trustee by reason. of
such maturity, the interest earned on such Escrow Obligations or Substitute Obligations, a list: of
any investments or reinvestments made by the Escrow Trustee in other such Escrow Obligations
or Substitute Obligations and the interest and/or principal derived therefrom, the sums paid to the
Fiscal Agencies, and any other transactions of the Escrow Trustee pertaining to its duties and
obligations as set forth herein.
In the event the maturing principal of and interest on the securities and money in the
Escrow Fund shall be insufficient at any time in the future to make an Escrow Payment, the
Escrow Trustee shall give the City prompt written notice of such projected insufficiency. Such
notice shall be accompanied by a written request directed to the City that the City deposit with
the Escrow Trustee, sums sufficient to make up the insufficiency. Any such written request need
be based only on the activity reports delivered pursuant to this Section 8. The City agrees to
make such deposit promptly.
Section 9. Substitute Obligations. The City reserves the right, from time to time and at
any time, to substitute for the Escrow Obligations initially purchased in accordance with
Section 4 hereof, other noncallable Government Obligations (the "Substitute Obligations");
provided, however, that prior to effecting any such substitution, the City shall have delivered to
the Escrow Trustee:
4
fArenton\w&s revref03
(a) A letter addressed to the City and the Escrow Trustee by a nationally recognized
firm of independent certified public accountants verifying the computations which indicate that
the Escrow Obligations, the Substitute Obligations, and other money to be held by the Escrow
Trustee after the proposed substitution for purposes of making the Escrow Payments will be
adequate to make all the Escrow Payments; and
(b) An opinion of Bond Counsel addressed to the City and the Escrow Trustee that
such substitution is of securities which may be deposited with the Escrow Trustee to accomplish
the defeasance of the Refunded Bonds in accordance with the ordinance pursuant to which they
were issued, and that such substitution will not cause the interest on the Refunded Bonds or the
Bonds to be included in gross income for purposes of federal income taxation.
Section 10. Reinvestment of Proceeds of Escrow Obligations and Substitute Obligations.
(a) The proceeds (principal and interest) and reinvestment proceeds of any Substitute
Obligations purchased by the Escrow Trustee in accordance with this Escrow Agreement shall be
reinvested by the Escrow Trustee in other Substitute Obligations on date of receipt, provided
that:
(1) The City shall have directed the Escrow Trustee in writing to make such
reinvestment;
(2) Such proceeds shall be reinvested in noncallable Government Obligations at a
yield not to exceed 0% or such higher yield as may be directed by letter of instructions from the
City to the Escrow Trustee, but if the composite yield on the directed investments made pursuant
to this Escrow Agreement would exceed 2.81006% (the yield on the Bonds), such letter of
instructions shall be based upon and accompanied by the opinion of Bond Counsel approving
reinvestment of such proceeds at such higher yield;
(3) The Substitute Obligations in which such proceeds are reinvested shall mature in
amounts not less than their respective purchase prices and on the date(s) directed by the City, but -
not later than the dates the principal thereof is needed to make one or more of the Escrow
Payments as such date(s) may be identified in the most recent report of a nationally recognized
firm of independent certified public accountants verifying the computations which indicate that
the Escrow Obligations, the Substitute Obligations, and other money to be held by the Escrow
Trustee after the proposed substitution for purposes of making the Escrow Payments will be
adequate to make all the Escrow Payments; and
(4) The City and Escrow Trustee shall receive from a nationally recognized firm of
independent certified public accountants a verification that such reinvestment satisfies the
conditions of Sections I0(a)(2) and I0(a)(3) hereof.
(b) If the proceeds of the securities and other money in the Escrow Fund are
insufficient to reinvest in the smallest denomination of Substitute Securities, or are required
sooner than the shortest maturity available for such Substitute Securities, or cannot be reinvested
5
f:\renton\w&s revrefU3
under the yield limitations described in Section 10(a)(2) hereof, or for any reason cannot be
reinvested in Substitute Securities, said proceeds shall be held uninvested in the Escrow Fund in
the form of United States currency.
(c) "Yield," as used herein, means that yield computed in accordance with and as
permitted by the Code as applicable to the Bonds and the trust under this Escrow Agreement so
as to preserve the exclusion of the interest on the Bonds from gross income for purposes of
federal income taxation.
(d) The Escrow Trustee shall retain with respect to each Escrow Obligation and
Substitute Obligation sufficient documentation to establish that each such security has been
acquired and disposed of on an established market in an arm's length transaction, at a price equal
to its fair market value and that no amounts have been paid to reduce the yield on such
obligation. The purchase and disposition prices of the Escrow Obligations and Substitute
Obligations (other than SLGS) shall be based on the mean between the bid and asked prices for
such investments on the date of purchase or disposition; and evidence of such prices shall be
retained by the Escrow Trustee.
Section 11. Surplus in Escrow. If, at any time during the term of the escrow created
pursuant to this Escrow Agreement, the securities and money held in the Escrow Fund exceed
the amounts required to make all of the Escrow Payments in accordance with the Escrow
Verification or any subsequent verification furnished to the Escrow Trustee pursuant to
Section 9(a) and/or Section 10(a) hereof, when due, considering the earnings to be realized on
the investment (but not reinvestment) of such securities and the City requests in writing that such
surplus securities or the proceeds thereof or such surplus money be returned by the Escrow
Trustee to the City, then the Escrow Trustee shall do so at the times requested by the City.
Before the application of any such surplus, the Escrow Trustee shall require the City to furnish
the Escrow Trustee, in a form satisfactory to it, a verification by a nationally recognized ffrm�of
independent certified public accountants of the amount of such surplus.
Section 12. Amendments of Escrow Agreement. The Escrow Trustee and the City
recognize that the holders and owners of the Refunded Bond's have a beneficial interest in the
obligations and money held in the Escrow Fund. It is therefore understood and agreed that this
Escrow Agreement shall not be subject to revocation or amendment except for the purpose of
clarifying any ambiguity herein or adding additional money or noncallable direct obligations of
the United States to the Escrow Fund, in either case at the request of the City or the Escrow
Trustee, which request shall be accompanied by an opinion of Bond Counsel addressed to the
City and the Escrow Trustee to the effect that such requested change does not detrimentally
affect the registered owners of the Refunded Bonds.
Notice of any such intended revocation or amendment, together with a copy of the
proposed amendments, if any, shall be sent at least three business days prior to the proposed
effective date of any such revocation or amendment, and notice of any holding of invalidity,
illegality or unenforceability shall be sent within 30 days following such decision, in either case,
by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, to:
6
f \renton\w&s revref03
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
99 Church Street
New York, New York 10007
Attn: Public Finance Rating Desk/Refunded Bonds
Standard & Poor's Ratings Service
25 Broadway
New York, New York 10004
FitchRatings
One State Street Plaza
New York, New York 10004
Section 13. Limitation of Escrow Trustee Duties. None of the provisions contained in
this Escrow Agreement shall require the Escrow Trustee to use or advance its own funds in the
performance of any of its duties or the exercise of any of its rights or powers hereunder. The
Escrow Trustee shall be under no liability for the payment of interest on any funds or other
property received by it hereunder except to the extent the Escrow Trustee is required by the
express terms of this Escrow Agreement to invest such funds and it fails to do so.
The Escrow Trustee's liabilities and obligations in connection with this Escrow
Agreement are confined to those specifically described herein. The Escrow Trustee is authorized
and directed to comply with the provisions of this Escrow Agreement and is relieved from all
liability for so doing notwithstanding any demand or notice to the contrary by any party hereto.
The Escrow Trustee shall not be responsible or liable for the sufficiency, correctness,
genuineness or validity of the Escrow Obligations or any Substitute Obligations deposited with
it; the performance of, or compliance by any party other than the Escrow Trustee with, the terms
or conditions of any such instruments or the terms or conditions of this Escrow Agreement; the
truth of the recitals herein; or any loss which may occur by reason of forgeries, false
representations or the exercise of the Escrow Trustee's discretion in any particular manner unless
such exercise is negligent or constitutes willful misconduct. If any controversy arises between
the City and any third person, the Escrow Trustee shall not be required to determine the same or
to take any action in the premises, but it may, in its discretion, institute an interpleader or other
proceedings in connection therewith as it may deem proper, and in following either course, it
shall not be liable and shall be indemnified by the City in respect thereof to the Escrow Trustee's
satisfaction.
The Escrow Trustee may conclusively rely upon and shall be protected in acting upon
any statement, certificate, notice, request, consent, order, opinion, report or other document
believed by it to be genuine and to have been signed or presented by the proper party. The
Escrow Trustee may consult counsel (including, but not limited to, Bond Counsel) in respect of
any question arising under this Escrow Agreement, and the Escrow Trustee shall not be liable for
any action taken or omitted in good faith upon advice of such counsel.
Section 14. Remission of Funds. At such time as the Escrow Trustee shall have received
both a certificate of the City to the effect that all of the Escrow Payments have been made and
7
fArenton\w&s revref03
the confirmation of such certificate by the Fiscal Agencies, together with such other evidence of
such payment as shall be satisfactory to the Escrow Trustee, the Escrow Trustee shall deliver
forthwith or remit to the City any remaining securities and money held pursuant to this Escrow
Agreement.
Section 15. Compensation of Escrow Trustee. The payment arrangement heretofore
made between the Escrow Trustee and the City as to compensation and expenses of the Escrow
Trustee for services rendered by it pursuant to the provisions of this Escrow Agreement is
satisfactory to it, to the City and no further payment to the Escrow Trustee, other than as
provided by such arrangement, shall be required for such purpose. Such arrangement for
compensation and expenses is intended as compensation for the ordinary services as
contemplated by this Escrow Agreement, and in the event that the Escrow Trustee renders any
service hereunder not expressly provided for in this Escrow Agreement, or the Escrow Trustee is
made a party to or intervenes in any litigation pertaining to this Escrow Agreement or institutes
interpleader proceedings relative hereto, the Escrow Trustee shall be reasonably compensated by
the City for such extraordinary services and reimbursed for all fees, costs, liability and expenses
(including reasonable attorneys' fees) occasioned thereby; provided, that the Escrow Trustee
shall have no lien or right of set-off against the Escrow Fund or the money or investments
therein.
Section 16. Merger of Escrow Trustee; Successor Escrow Trustee. Any corporation or
association into which the Escrow Trustee may be converted or merged, or with which it may be
consolidated, or to which it may sell or transfer its corporate trust business and assets as a whole
or substantially as a whole, or any corporation or association resulting from any such conversion,
sale, merger, consolidation or transfer to which it is a party, ,iiso facto, shall be and become
successor Escrow Trustee hereunder and vested with all of the title to the Escrow Fund and all
the trusts, powers, discretions, immunities, privileges and all other matters as was it predecessor,
without the execution or filing of any instrument or any further act, deed or conveyance on the',
part of any of the parties hereto, provided that such resulting entity shall meet the requirements
of RCW 39.53.070. Further, the obligations assumed by the Escrow Trustee pursuant to this
Escrow Agreement may be transferred by the Escrow Trustee to a successor if. (a) the Escrow
Trustee has presented eviden6e� satisfactory to the City and Bond Counsel that the successor
meets the requirements of RCW 39.53.070, as now in effect or hereafter amended; (b) the
successor has assumed all the obligations of the Escrow Trustee under this Escrow Agreement;
and (c) the Escrow Fund has been duly transferred to such successor. From and after the date
any successor trustee is duly established hereunder, the predecessor Escrow Trustee shall have
no duty or responsibility hereunder, and shall in no event be liable for any action or failure to act
of the successor.
Section 17. Notice of Call of the 1993 Bonds. The City hereby directs the Escrow
Trustee to request the Fiscal Agencies give such notice as may be required, at the time(s) and in
the manner required pursuant to Ordinance No. 4410, in order to effect the redemption of the
1993 Bonds on October 1, 2003, as described therein.
Section 18. Notices. All notices or requests required or permitted to be given hereunder
shall, until further notice in writing, be given in writing at the following addresses:
8
f:Venton\w&s revref03
To the City:
Finance Director
City of Renton
1055 South Grady
Renton, Washington 98058
(425) 430-6858
(425) 430-6855 (facsimile)
with a copy to:
Gottlieb, Fisher & Andrews, PLLC
1325 Fourth Avenue, Suite 1200
Seattle, Washington 98101
(206) 654-1999
(206) 654-8725 (facsimile)
To the Escrow Trustee:
U.S. Bank National Association
PD-WA-T7CT
1420 Fifth Avenue, 7th Floor
Seattle, Washington 98101
(206) 344-4687
(206) 344-4632 (facsimile)
Section 19. Miscellaneous. This Escrow Agreement is governed by the law of the State
of Washington and may not be modified except in a writing signed by the parties. In the event
any one or more of the provisions contained in this Escrow Agreement shall for any reason be
held to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any respect, such invalidity, illegality or
unenforceability shall not affect'any other provisions of this Escrow Agreement, but this Escrow
Agreement shall be construed as if such invalid or illegal or unenforceable provision had never
been contained herein.
E
f:\renton\w&s revref03
i
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed and delivered this Escrow
Agreement pursuant to due and proper authorization, all as of September 30, 2003.
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
Victoria Runkle
Finance Director
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Escrow
Trustee
am
Authorized Signatory
10
f:\renton\w&s revrefU3
4
SCHEDULE 1
ESCROW OBLIGATIONS
Type of
Maturity
Par
Security
Date
Amount
Rate
SLGS
11/1/03
$37,937.00
0.85%
SLGS
5/ 1 /04
5,165.00
1.00
SLGS
I 1 / 1 /04
220,194.00
1.14
11
f:\renton\ w&s revrefD3
SCHEDULE2
ESCROW VERIFICATION
Coil
CAUSEY DEMGEN & MOORE INC.
[Attached]
12
fArenton\ w&s revref03
Accounting Fees
Bond Counsel
Trustee & Counsel Fees
Rating Agency Fee
Underwriter's Expenses
POS/Official Statement
Miscellaneous
TOTAL
SCHEDULE3
ISSUANCE COSTS FOR THE BONDS
13
AGENDA
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
September 29, 2003
Monday, 11:30 a.m,
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL
3. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
Ordinance for first reading and advancement for second and final reading:
Amending Section 18 of Ordinance #5019 regarding the issuance and sale of Water and Sewer
Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2003, to designate the bonds as Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations for
purposes of Section 265 of the Internal Revenue Code; and declaring an emergency and establishing
an immediate effective date for this ordinance.
4. ADJOURNMENT
• Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk •
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Special Meeting
September 29, 2003
Council Chambers
Monday, 11:30 a.m.
MINUTES Renton City Hall
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Jesse Tanner led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the
meeting of the Renton City Council to order.
ROLL CALL OF
KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Council President; TERRI BRIERE; KING
COUNCILMEMBERS
PARKER; DON PERSSON; DAN CLAWSON. MOVED BY PERSSON,
SECONDED BY PARKER, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT
COUNCILMEMBERS RANDY CORMAN AND TONI NELSON.
CARRIED.
CITY STAFF IN
JESSE TANNER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief Administrative Officer;
ATTENDANCE
LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk;
VICTORIA RUNKLE, Finance & Information Services Administrator;
ELAINE GREGORY, Fiscal Services Director; DEREK TODD, Assistant to
the CAO; COMMANDER KENT CURRY, Police Department.
ORDINANCES AND
The following ordinance was presented for first reading and advanced for
RESOLUTIONS
second and final reading:
Ordinance #5020
An ordinance was read amending Section 18 of Ordinance #5019 regarding the
Finance: Bond Issuance, Water
issuance and sale of Water and Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2003, to
& Sewer Revenue Refunding -
designate the bonds as "Qualified Tax -Exempt Obligations" for purposes of
Designate as Qualified Tax-
Section 265 of the Internal Revenue Code; and declaring an emergency and
Exempt Obligations
establishing an immediate effective date for this ordinance.*
Victoria Runkle, Finance and Information Services Administrator, explained
that the bonds approved by City Council on September 22, 2003, Ordinance
#5019, were intended to be "qualified tax-exempt obligations" under Section
265 of the Internal Revenue Code, and two Washington state financial
institutions have committed to purchase $2.8 million of the bonds on that basis.
Because a sentence was left out of Ordinance #5019 by the Bond Counsel to
designate the bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations," also known as bank -
qualified bonds, this amending ordinance is necessary in order to designate the
qualification and enable closing of the bond sale on September 30, 2003.
*MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADVANCE
THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED.
Following second and final reading of the above ordinance, it was MOVED BY
PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADOPT THE
ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY PARKER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN.
CARRIED. Time: 11:35 a.m.
BONNIE I. WALTON, City Clerk
Recorder: Suzann Lombard
September 29, 2003
CITY OF RENTON, WASIUNGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 5020
'ke vis&d O dmanc'e..
o ly, as appolmed by
_32rd &an e f 4 &_�Y o4warlkr
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,
AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 5019 OF THE CITY TO AMEND
SECTION 18 TO DESIGNATE THE BONDS AS "QUALIFIED TAX-
EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS" FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 265 OF THE
INTERNAL REVENUE CODE; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY
AND ESTABLISHING AN IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS
ORDINANCE
WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 5019, passed by the City Council and approved
by the Mayor on September 22, 2003, the City authorized the issuance and sale of its Water and
Sewer Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2003 (the "Bonds") for the purpose of providing a part of the
funds necessary to refund, on a current basis, and defease all of the City's outstanding Water and
Sewer Refunding and Improvement Revenue Bonds, 1993, to advance refund and defease all of
the City's outstanding Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, 1994, and to pay the costs related to the
sale and issuance of the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, the Bonds will bring a significant debt service savings to the City; and
WHEREAS, the Bonds were intended to be "qualified tax-exempt obligations" under
Section 265 of the Code, were so described in the Preliminary Official Statement pertaining to
the Bonds, dated September 10, 2003, were priced on this basis, and financial institutions have
committed to purchase the Bonds on this basis at interest rates favorable to the City; and
WHEREAS, the City has represented in the Bond Purchase Agreement, dated September
22, 2003, between D.A. Davidson & Co., that the information in the Preliminary Official
Statement is true and correct; and
1
ORDINANCE NO. 5020
WHEREAS, unless the amendments set forth in this Ordinance are in effect prior to the
closing scheduled for September 30, 2003, the Bonds will not be designated as "qualified tax-
exempt obligations," which will imperil the closing of the Bonds and put the City at risk; and
WHEREAS, there is insufficient time for this Ordinance to become effective in the
ordinary course of business prior to the closing and the only way for this ordinance to become
effective prior to such closing is through the declaration of this emergency; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the City to amend Ordinance No. 5019 to
designate the Bonds as "qualified tax-exempt obligations" for purposes of Section 265 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code") and declare an emergency to ensure
that the Bonds are issued and delivered at the most favorable interest rate and without risk to the
City.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. Section 18 of Ordinance No. 5019 is amended in its entirety as follows:
Section 18. No Private Activity Bonds; Bank Qualification. The City covenants that it
will take no actions and will make no use of the proceeds of the Bonds or any other funds held
under this ordinance which would cause any Bond to be treated as a "private activity bond" (as
defined in Section 141(b) of the Code) subject to treatment under said Section 141(b) as an
obligation not described in Section 103(a) of the Code, unless the tax exemption thereof is not
affected.
The City covenants that it will not issue more than $10,000,000 of "qualified tax-exempt
obligations," as defined in Section 265 of the Code (relating to the deduction by financial
2
ORDINANCE NO. 5020
institutions of a portion of the interest incurred to carry tax-exempt debt) during calendar year
2003. The City hereby designates the Bonds as "qualified. tax-exempt obligations" for such
purposes and authorizes and directs the proper City officials to execute and deliver all documents
necessary to evidence such designation to any and all interested parties.
Section II. In all other respects, Ordinance No. 5019 shall remain in full force and
effect and shall not be amended or modified hereby.
Section III. Declaration of Emergency - Effective Date. This ordinance, being the
exercise of a power specifically delegated to the legislative body of the City, is not subject to
referendum. The City Council hereby declares, pursuant to RCW 35A.12.130 and Renton
Municipal Code Section 1-2-2(B), that an emergency exists necessitating that this ordinance take
effect immediately in order to preserve the public health, safety, property, peace, and for the
support of city government and its existing public institutions.
Based upon the foregoing declaration of emergency, this Ordinance shall become
effective immediately upon passage by the City Council.
3
ORDINANCE NO. 5020
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 29th day of September, 2003.
Bonnie Walton, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 29th day of September, 2003.
Approved as to Form:
Judith Andrews, Bond Counsel
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
4