Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil 10/10/2005AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING October 10, 2005 Monday, 7:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. PROCLAMATION: Arts and Humanities Month - October, 2005 4. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: BuRSST (Northwest Foundation) Report PUBLIC MEETING WITH THE INITIATOR: Leitch Annexation - 10% Notice of Intent to annex petition for 14.6 acres bounded by SE 136th St., 140th Ave. SE, SE 138th St., if extended, and 143rd Ave. SE 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. a. Approval of Council meeting minutes of 10/3/2005. Council concur. b. Court Case filed on behalf of the Estate of James Frederick Brutsche, et al by John R. Muenster, 1111 3rd Ave., Suite 2220, Seattle, 98101, pertaining to a police drug raid on the Brutsche family property located in the City of Kent on 7/10/2003. Refer to City Attorney & Insurance Services. c. Development Services Division recommends approval to replace the option for deferral of street improvements for short plats with participation in fee -in -lieu -of deferred street improvements. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. d. Development Services Division recommends approval, with conditions, of the Cherie Lane Final Plat; 16 single-family lots on 4.98 acres located at S. 35th St. and Wells Ave. S. (FP-05-073). Council concur. (See 11. for resolution.) e. Development Services Division recommends acceptance of a deed of dedication for additional right-of-way on Bremerton Ave. NE to fulfill requirements of both the Ridgeview Court Plat (PP-04-131) and the Elmhurst Final Plat (FP-05-090). Council concur. f. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends a public hearing be set on 10/24/2005 to consider the proposed Mosier II Annexation and future zoning of the site, the boundaries of which were expanded by the Boundary Review Board from 31.24 to 65 acres. The site is located between 140th Ave. SE and Lyons Ave. NE, north of SE 136th St. Council concur. g. Human Resources and Risk Management Department requests approval of the Renton Police Officers' Guild Commissioned Unit and Renton Firefighters Local 864 labor agreements, each for three years (2006 to 2008). Council concur. h. Transportation Systems Division recommends concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding Renton Hill access. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) 9. CORRESPONDENCE 10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. Report from 9/30/2005 Eastside Transportation Partnership meeting regarding Bus Rapid Transit b. Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. 1) Finance Committee: Vouchers; Business License Fee Reporting Period Changes; Contract Policy & Procedure 2) Transportation (Aviation) Committee: SR-167 Mainline Alignment Concurrence with WSDOT; Sprint Master Use Agreement*; Bosair Lease Addendum and AcuWings Operating Permit 3) Utilities Committee: Fund Transfer from Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update & N. 26th St./Park Pl. N. Storm Improvement Projects; Contract Addendum with HDR Engineering for Maplewood Water Treatment Facility 11. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolution: Cherie Lane Final Plat (see 8.d.) Ordinance for first reading: Sprint Master Use Agreement (see 10.b.2) 12. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 13. AUDIENCE COMMENT 14. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) CANCELLED • 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 1 1:00 AM & 9:00 NM, WED. & FRI. AT 9:00 AM & 7:00 I'M AND SAT. & SUN. AT l :00 I'M & 9:00 I'M RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting October- 10, 2005 Council Chambers Monday, 7:00 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF RANDY CORMAN, Council President Pro Tem; DENIS LAW; DAN COUNCILMEMBERS CLAWSON; TONI NELSON; DON PERSSON; MARCIE PALMER. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL EXCUSE ABSENT COUNCIL PRESIDENT TERRI BRIERE. CARRIED. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief ATTENDANCE Administrative Officer; ZANETTA FONTES, Assistant City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; SANDRA MEYER, Transportation Systems Director; NICK AFZALI, Planning and Programming Supervisor; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; DON ERICKSON, Senior Planner; LINDA HERZOG, Interim Assistant to the CAO; MIKE WEBBY, Human Resources Administrator; COMMANDER KEVIN MILOSEVICH, Police Department. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Keolker-Wheeler was read declaring the month of Arts and Humanities Month - October 2005, to be "Arts and Humanities Month" in the City of Renton and October 2005 encouraging all citizens to join in the special observance as arts and humanities enhance and enrich the lives of all Americans. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE PROCLAMATION AS READ. CARRIED. Barbara Nielsen, President of the Allied Arts Council, accepted the proclamation. She announced that an Allied Arts of Renton Family Concert, featuring the Seattle Philharmonic Orchestra, will be held at the IKEA Performing Arts Center on October 30th. Pointing out that Renton offers many venues for the arts, such as three live theaters and the annual art festival, Ms. Nielsen expressed her appreciation for Renton's support of the arts. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Tom Carlson, BuRSST for Prosperity Executive Director, explained that Human Services: BuRSST for BuRSST is a new long-term initiative to strengthen communities and generate Prosperity, Northwest Area prosperity for all residents of Burien, Renton, SeaTac, Tukwila, and the Foundation community of Skyway. He noted that the Northwest Area Foundation identified the following trend in this Central South King County area: the shift in urban poverty from urban, inner-city neighborhoods to the "first ring" communities at the larger city's edge. Mr. Carlson reported that a community -developed and driven strategic plan was developed to tackle poverty. The plan consists of four strategies: improve family stability, enhance economic opportunity, invest in children and youth, and build strong communities. He indicated that a team of community advocates representing the diverse geographic and ethnic communities within BuRSST is being deployed to build connections within and among the communities. Additionally, a multi -cultural training institute is being launched to help develop and train new community leaders. October 10, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 345 PUBLIC MEETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and published in Annexation: Leitch, SE 136th accordance with local and State laws, Mayor Keolker-Wheeler opened the St & 140th Ave SE public meeting to consider the 10% Notice of Intent to annex petition for the proposed Leitch Annexation; 14.6 acres bounded generally by 140th Ave. SE, if extended, on the west, 143rd Ave. SE, if extended, on the east, SE 136th St., if extended, on the north, and SE 138th St., if extended on the south. Senior Planner Don Erickson reported that eight single-family dwellings exist on this site, which is virtually flat except for the southeast corner where Maplewood Creek is present. Reviewing the public services, he noted the site is served by Fire District #25, Water District #90, Renton sewer, and the Renton School District. Existing King County zoning is R-4 (four dwelling units per gross acre), and Renton's Comprehensive Plan designates the site as Residential Low Density for which R-4 (four dwelling units per net acre) zoning is proposed. Continuing, Mr. Erickson pointed out that improvements on SE 136th St., 140th Ave. SE, and 143rd Ave. SE are needed to meet City standards, and will mostly likely be paid for by developers. He also pointed out the potential drainage problems, noting that King County's 2005 Surface Water Manual, Level 2 standards are recommended for new development. Mr. Erickson stated that the fiscal impact analysis indicates a surplus of $450 at current development and a surplus of $13,773 at full development, assuming an increase to 46 single- family homes. Additionally, he noted the estimated one-time parks acquisition and development cost of $20,984. In conclusion, Mr. Erickson reported that the annexation proposal is generally consistent with Renton policies and Boundary Review Board criteria. The annexation serves the best interests and general welfare of the City, particularly if it facilitates annexation of the unincorporated area to the west and south. Public comment was invited. There being none, it was MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING. CARRIED. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE LEITCH 10% ANNEXATION PETITION, AND AUTHORIZE CIRCULATION OF THE 60% DIRECT PETITION TO ANNEX REQUIRING THAT SIGNERS SUPPORT ZONING CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SUPPORT PROPERTY OWNERS ASSUMING A PROPORTIONAL SHARE OF THE CITY'S BONDED INDEBTEDNESS. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Chief Administrative Officer Jay Covington reviewed a written administrative REPORT report summarizing the City's recent progress towards goals and work programs adopted as part of its business plan for 2005 and beyond. Items noted included: Take part in the "Cedar River Salmon Journey" this fall, and see spawning salmon. Volunteer naturalists will be stationed from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Renton Library (100 Mill Ave. S.), Cavanaugh Pond (east of Renton on the Cedar River, on Maple Valley Hwy.), and Landsburg Park (276th Ave. SE in Kent) on October 15th, 22nd, 23rd, and 29th. October 10, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 346 The public is invited to attend Are You Readv?, a free Puget Sound region emergency preparedness event at the Seattle Exhibition Hall on October 21 st and 22nd. Product suppliers and experts in preparedness will display and sell emergency and safety products, services and technologies. * "files commemorating veterans will be engraved during the week of October 17th to 21 st, weather permitting, at Veterans Memorial Park. Applications are now being accepted for the Spring 2006 engraving, which will be completed in time for Memorial Day 2006. The cost is $50 per name. Council: Initiative 912 (Motor Noting the importance of being informed about State Initiative 912 (motor Vehicle Fuel Taxes Repeal) vehicle fuel taxes repeal), it was MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL HOLD A PUBLIC MEETING ON INITIATIVE 912 ON 10/17/2005. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Tom Carpenter, 15006 SE 139th 11T, Renton, 98059, indicated that he has lived Citizen Cornment: Carpenter - in the unincorporated East Renton Plateau area for 25 years and is a member of Annexation Policy, Perception the Four Creeks Unincorporated Area Council and a citizens advisory board by Public that is advising on annexation open house and discussion events. Mr. Carpenter expressed concerns that Renton's annexation policy is not perceived as positive by the public, which is shown for example, by the lack of the City's name on a flier advertising an upconung annexation open house. He explained that in the absence of a positive message, residents may feel that local governments are abandoning them, thus perpetuating the feeling that they have no control over their own destiny. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL ALLOW THE SPEAKER FIVE ADDITIONAL MINUTES FOR HIS COMMENTS. CARRIED. Mr. Carpenter stated that he is active in the development of the comprehensive plan for the East Plateau, and although he supports the objectives of the Growth Management Act (GMA), he is a critic of its implementation. Noting that residents in the growth areas have little say in the changes that affect their neighborhoods, Mr. Carpenter emphasized that Renton has an opportunity to deliver a positive message during this contentious GMA implementation process. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated that Renton is participating in the annexation workshops, and pointed out that Renton supports annexations when they are in the best interest of the City. Councilman Clawson noted the importance of evaluating each annexation individually, and expressed his hope that Renton is not inadvertently communicating a less than welcoming message to East Plateau residents. Citizen Comment: Bosair Douglas N. Owens, PO Box 25416, Seattle, 98165, stated that he represents Mr. Lease at Airport, AcuWings and Mrs. Acuner and their company AcuWings, LLC, who are applying for an Operating Permit and operating permit for a flight school and aviation supply and rental business at Agreement Renton Airport in property leased by Bosair, LLC. He pointed out that the Transportation (Aviation) Committee is recommending approval of the AcuWings operating permit, and the change to the Bosair lease to permit the activities. Mr. Owens urged Council to approve the Committee's recommendation. (See page 348 for Committee report.) October 10, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 347 CONSENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing. Council Meeting Minutes of Approval of Council meeting minutes of 10/3/2005. Council concur. 10/3/2005 Court Case: Estate of James Court Case filed on behalf of the Estate of James Frederick Brutsche, et al by Frederick Brutsche, CRT-05- John R. Muenster, 1111 3rd Ave., Suite 2220, Seattle, 98101, pertaining to a 012 police drug raid on the Brutsche family property located in the City of Kent on 7/10/2003. Refer to City Attorney & Insurance Services. Development Services: Development Services Division recommended approval to replace the option Deferral of Street for deferral of street improvements for short plats with participation in fee -in - Improvements lieu -of deferred street improvements. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Plat: Cherie Lane, S 35th St & Development Services Division recommended approval, with conditions, of the Wells Ave S, FP-05-073 Cherie Lane Final Plat; 16 single-family lots on 4.98 acres located at S. 35th St. and Wells Ave. S. (FP-05-073). Council concur. (See page 349 for resolution.) Development Services: Development Services Division recommended acceptance of a deed of Ridgeview Court & Elmhurst dedication for additional right-of-way on Bremerton Ave. NE to fulfill Plats, ROW Dedication, requirements of both the Ridgeview Court Plat (PP-04-131) and the Elmhurst Bremerton Ave NE Final Plat (FP-05-090). Council concur. Annexation: Mosier II, 140th Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Ave SE & SE 136th St recommended a public hearing be set on 10/24/2005 to consider the proposed Mosier II Annexation and future zoning of the site, the boundaries of which were expanded from 31.24 to 65 acres. The site is located between 140th Ave. SE and Lyons Ave. NE, north of SE 136th St. Council concur. Human Resources: Police Human Resources and Risk Management Department requested approval of the Officers Guild Commissioned Renton Police Officers' Guild Commissioned Unit and Renton Firefighters & Local 864 Firefighters Local 864 labor agreements, each for three years (2006 to 2008). Council Labor Contracts concur. WSDOT: Renton Hill Access Transportation Systems Division recommended concurrence with the Concurrence Letter Washington State Department of Transportation regarding Renton Hill access. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Councilman Corman reported on the Eastside Transportation Partnership's Transportation: Bus Rapid (ETP) recommendation for Sound Transit Phase 2 (ST2), in particular the issue Transit of I-405 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). He explained that prior to a recent ETP meeting, BRT was not an element of ST2, and thanks to the work of City staff and elected officials, ETP was successful in the listing of the BRT stations and capital improvements on the ST2 plan for evaluation by Sound Transit. Councilman Corman gave a briefing on BRT, highlighting characteristics of the bus, including its low floor design, configuration, capacity, and precision docking capability. He noted BRT's streamlined fare collection system, and the queue jump lanes and transit signal priority, which allows BRT to bypass queues of general-purpose vehicles at intersections and to extend the signal green time or reduce the signal red time at intersections. Mr. Corman displayed conceptual drawings of the park and rides and inline stations, and drawings of the potential alignment of this transit service. October 10, 2005 Rcnton City Cnnncd Minntr. P„re 3 1 S Nick Afzali, Planning and Progranuning Supervisor, reviewed the potential alignments, noting that they are the result of a June 16, 2005, 1-405 South Corridor BRT pre -design report, conducted as part of the 1-405 Corridor Program. Mr. Corman also pointed out that the 1-405 Corridor Program Executive Committee reviewed various treatments for the corridor and determined that BRT was the best rapid transit option. Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chair Corman presented a report recommending CAG: 03-168, Maplewood concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve Addendum No. 3 to CAG- Water Treatment Facility 03-168, agreement with H.DR Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $134,21 1 for Improvements, HDR additional engineering services assistance for the construction of the Engineering Maplewood Water Treatment Improvements Project. MOVFD BY CORMAN.. SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Utility: Springbrook Creek Utilities Committee ('hair Corman presented a report recommending Floodplain Map & N 26th concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the fund transfer of St/Park PI N Storm $130,000 from the SW 7th St. Drainage Improvement Project Phase II, Lind Improvement Projects Fund Ave. SW to Morris Ave. S. (account 421.600.18.5960.38.65.65430) to the Transfer following Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program project accounts: • Funds in the amount of $50,000 to the Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update Project (account 421.600. l 8.5960.38.65.65287); and • Funds in the amount of $80,000 to the N. 26th St. and Park Pl. N. Storm Improvement Project (account 421.600.18.5960.38.65.65330). The transferred funds will be used for consultant modeling, construction, easement acquisition, and other project costs. MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL, CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 241479 - 241977 and two wire transfers totaling $2,748,053.95; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 60209 - 60440, one wire transfer, and 588 direct deposits totaling $1,894,637.03. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN TIfE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Transportation (Aviation) Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor WSDOT: SR-167 Mainline and City Clerk to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Alignment Concurrence Letter Department of Transportation regarding the SR-167 mainline alignment from the southern Renton City limit to 1-405. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Airport: Bosair Lease, Transportation (Aviation) Committee Chair Palmer presented a report AcuWings Operating Permit recommending approval of a new lease agreement with Bosair, LLC at the and Agreement Renton Airport (LAG-05-004). The Committee further recommended approval of an operating permit and agreement with AcuWings, LLC to sublease from Bosair, LLC for the purposes of flight training services, aircraft rental, and the sale of pilot supplies to the general public. MOVED BY PALMER, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. October 10, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 349 Mayor Keolker-Wheeler stated for the record that the Administration recommended denial of the action for the following reasons: 1) The precedent that is created because the existing Bosair lease did not allow flight schools and there are other locations at the airport that do allow flight schools. The Administration did not want to a change an existing lease to allow a use that is not normally allowed. 2) Concerns from residents regarding the impacts from flight schools and the planes that circle the area, and Council's prior direction to deal with those issues differently than proposed. 3) The presence of an Airport Plan, which is another direction from Council, that proposes higher and better uses for the Airport. Councilwoman Palmer explained that AcuWings has shown that they are concerned about the residents, will be a good tenant, and have participated with the Airport Advisory Committee. She noted that the flight school has different plans than the flight schools currently in place. Ms. Palmer stated for the record that the decision was made with a great deal of thought and investigation. RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3775 A resolution was read approving the Cherie Lane Final Plat; 4.98 acres located Plat: Cherie Lane, S 35th St & in the vicinity of S. 35th St. and Wells Ave. S. (FP-05-073). MOVED BY Wells Ave S, FP-05-073 CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 10/17/2005 for second and final reading: Franchise: Sprint An ordinance was read granting unto Sprint Communications Company L.P., a Communications, Fiber Optic Delaware Limited Partnership, its successors and assigns, the right, privilege, Communication Facilities authority and master use agreement to install telecommunication facilities together with appurtenances thereto, upon, over, under, along, across the streets, avenues, and alleys of the City of Renton within City right-of-way and public properties of the City. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 10/17/2005. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL REFER Council: 2006 Legislative 2006 LEGISLATIVE PRIORITIES TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. Priorities CARRIED. EXECUTIVE SESSION MOVED BY CORMAN, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL RECESS INTO AND ADJOURNMENT EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR APPROXIMATELY 70 MINUTES TO DISCUSS LITIGATION WITH NO OFFICIAL ACTION TO BE TAKEN AND THAT THE COUNCIL MEETING BE ADJOURNED WHEN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION IS ADJOURNED. CARRIED. Time: 8:06 p.m. Executive session was conducted. There was no action taken. The executive session and the Council meeting adjourned at 9:21 p.m. Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann October 10, 2005 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING October 10, 2005 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE (Briere) COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE (Persson) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (Clawson) PUBLIC SAFETY (Law) TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) (Palmer) UTILITIES (Gorman) MON., 10/17 2006 Legislative Priorities; 5:00 p.m. Third Quarter Financial Report *Council Conference Room* MON., 10/17 Renton Transit Center Safety Concerns 4:00 p.m. NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Whexea4; the arts and humanities enhance and enrich the lives of all Americans; and W herecw the arts and humanities affect every aspect of life in America today, including the economy, social problem solving, job creation, education, creativity, and community livability; and W herea,k, cities and states — through their local and state arts agencies and representing thousands of cultural organizations — have celebrated the value and importance of culture in the lives of Americans and the health of thriving communities during National Arts and Humanities Month for several years; and W harem; the United States Conference of Mayors has actively participated in National Arts and Humanities Month since 1984; and W he,Yeak; the United States Conference of Mayors' national arts partner, Americans for the Arts, will again coordinate this year a national awareness campaign of activities for National Arts and Humanities Month; and W herea4, the nation's 40,000 cultural organizations, the National Endowment for the Arts, the National Endowment for the Humanities, the nation's 4,000 local arts agencies, the arts and humanities councils of the 50 states and U.S. jurisdictions, and the President of the United States have participated in the past and will be asked to participate again this year in this national celebration; and Whexea%, the month of October 2005 has been designated as National Arts and Humanities Month; No-w, Therefare; I, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor of the City of Renton, do hereby proclaim October 2005 to be A vts a+i& Y u*na4ltirwely Mdiit1v in the City of Renton, and I encourage all citizens to join me in this special observance. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the City of Renton to be affixed this 1 Oth day of October, 2005. Kathy Ke ker-Wheeler Mayor of the City of Renton, Washington RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6500 / FAX (425) 430-6523 eThis paper contains 50% recycled material, 30 % post consumer Ilk BuRSST ;,Av for Prosperity BuRSST'''. ` Origins for Prosperity • 2001— BuRSST communities identified • 2002-2003 — Outreach to diverse communities • 2003-2004 — Inclusive strategic planning • 2005 — Launch IRSST °$. Strategic Plan for Prosperity 1. Improve Family Stability 2. Enhance Economic Opportunity 3. Invest in Children and Youth 4. Build Strong Communities �t IRSST - Mission for Prosperity • Long-term initiative • To strengthen communities and generate prosperity for all residents of Burien, Renton, SeaTac, Skyway and Tukwila RJRSST �4. Strategy for Prosperity • Community developed and driven • Asset -based • Builds on strengths • Focused on deep-rooted change RIRSST'°v, Family Stability for Prosperity • First step on journey to prosperity • Better access to basic necessities • Integrated community services • People -to -people connections �t 1 BuRSST Economic Opportunity for Prosperity • Training for living wage jobs • Starting and expanding businesses • Building family assets • Certifying foreign -trained professionals A BUIRSSTStrong Communities for Prosperity • Develop new community leaders • Nurture community -based organizations • Increase capacity to address community concerns and collaborate • Make connections within and among diverse communities BJRSST Children and Youth for Prosperity • Early childhood development and school readiness • Improved ties with public schools • Out -of -school experiences for youth • Strengthen existing initiatives • Increased and improved, culturally competent programs RiRSST Vision for Prosperity A community that welcomes, values and cares for each other and encourages connection, participation and involvement so that all community members may live well. N BuRSST for Prosperity Vision We are a community that welcomes, values, and cares for each other and encourages connection, participation, and involvement so that all community members may live well. Mission BuRSST for Prosperity is a bold, long-term initiative to strengthen communities and generate prosperity for all residents of Burien, Renton, SeaTac, Skyway and Tukwila. BuRSST has brought together hundreds of people from diverse communities affected by poverty, along with a rich network of institutional partners. Strategy BuRSST has forged and is now taking action on a community -driven strategy. Our strategy builds on the assets of communities to produce the deep-rooted change needed to bring about well-being for all. • Improve Family Stability. BuRSST is integrating community services and people - to -people connections to help individuals and families improve access to the basic necessities —food, energy assistance, housing, and health care —needed to stabilize their lives and get started on paths to prosperity. • Enhance Economic Opportunity. BuRSST is connecting people with training for living -wage jobs; helping residents create and expand businesses; assisting families to build assets; and plans to help certify immigrants who have professional skills so they can use those skills in our community. • Invest in Children and Youth. BuRSST has strategies for the two stages that are key to success in adulthood: (1) early childhood development and school readiness; and (2) out -of -school experiences that support social, emotional, academic, and career development of youth. BuRSST is working to strengthen existing community initiatives to in improve the quality of, and access to culturally competent services. • Build Strong Communities. BuRSST is developing new community leaders and nurturing community -based organizations to give voice to community concerns, to address community needs, and to collaborate with organizations throughout the community. 305 South 43rd Street Renton, WA 98055 1 tel 425-687-2781 fax 425-687-0352 ATTACHMENT A The Central South King County Venture A Strategic Plan to Reduce Poverty Final Plan Submitted to the Northwest Area Foundation By the Temporary Coordinating Committee June 30, 2004 "We are a community that welcomes, values, and cares for each other and encourages connection, participation and involvement so that all community members may live well." Prepared by The Cedar River Group 500 Union Street, Suite 1045 Seattle, Washington 98101 206-223-7660 Central South King County Strategic Plan i South Central King County Coun Overview Sea111e `r, �± L81c4W961�rfQian � tewcasus F WNQ Canes z, vz Yak t 7r.�, '�`... Ek�3�,., VA h3 IffiR ! £pi �xac SS N�pypcbs �.j East H PAWdab _ mdnis 23 - - - ftd ILAM Ej/elelq/. 11��1'�LNFtrIM1W Central South King County Strategic Plan 11 Central South King County Strategic Plan Executive Summary Background The cities of Burien, SeaTac, Tukwila and Renton, and the community of Skyway make up Central South King County. Three years ago the Northwest Area Foundation identified Central South King County as a prime area where a new and challenging trend is at work. This trend is the shift in urban poverty from urban, inner-city neighborhoods to the "first ring" communities at the larger city's edge. It is to such communities that the children of big -city residents are moving. They seek there more affordable housing, better schools and new job opportunities. In addition, refugees and immigrants who would once have gone to inner-city neighborhoods now seek a foothold in surrounding cities and communities. Like many metropolitan areas, King County has been slow to recognize and respond to this migration of the poor. Yet the evidence of the migration is clear. The available data show that in comparison to all of King County, the Central South King County area has: • More racial and ethnic diversity, including more than 20 percent foreign -born; • A higher poverty rate; • A high eligibility for and use of public assistance programs; • A high percentage of school children eligible for the free- and reduced -price lunch and in transitional English programs; • School students speaking more languages than in most school districts in the state; • A higher school drop -out rate; and • A larger number of adults without health insurance. Even these facts do not tell the whole story: • Most of the numbers are from the 2000 Census, now four years old. Since then the economy has worsened and the pace of demographic change has been speeding up. • A long-standing weakness in census data is that immigrants, refugees and the homeless are under -counted. This is a result of a number of factors. Among these are the lack of a permanent address and fears about reporting information to a government agency. • Adding to the challenge is the fact that Washington has had the most rapid increase in immigration rate of any state in the past decade. In addition, King County is a magnet for secondary migration by immigrants and refugees who settled fast in another city. To search for the reality beyond the numbers, the Northwest Area Foundation formed a team with community members. For two years the team reached out to all the diverse groups who struggle with poverty in Central South King County. Working through "informal community leaders," they conducted surveys, held focus groups and sponsored community meetings. They learned from residents' experiences and ideas. Together they created a vision of "a community that welcomes, values, and cares for each other, and encourages connection, participation and involvement so that all community members live well. " In mid-2003, the team created a Temporary Coordinating Committee (TCC). It was the TCC's job to identify strategies to achieve the community's vision. The TCC chose strategic planning Central South King County Strategic Plan 2 and outreach consultants. Together they broadened the community dialogue to include even more groups. The Strategic Plan Strategies This Strategic Plan is the product of those two years of effort. It was created by literally hundreds of individuals. They worked together in planning sessions sometimes held in 10 different languages and that drew as many as 500 people. The Plan is a 10-year action program to reduce poverty in Central South King County. It draws heavily from the ideas and opinions of the participants. It also draws on the lessons from many generations and ethnic communities in America who successfully made the journey out of poverty. It is designed to mobilize the energy and wisdom of the community in a cooperative "Venture" with the Northwest Area Foundation. This Venture will carry out the following four strategies. 1. Improve Family Stability — Family stability is the key to improved economic status, school success for children, and building relationships with neighbors. When families have easy access to basic necessities (such as food, housing and health care) and connections with others facing the same challenges and with members of the larger community, they are in a much better position to move forward. The Venture will develop an integrated system of community services along with peer networks to help families and individuals to stabilize their lives, to prepare to succeed in the economy and to participate fully in community life. 2. Expand Economic Opportunity — For communities to reduce poverty, the individuals and families must have access to good jobs, training to improve their skills, and business and economic opportunities that build assets for themselves and their community. The Venture will strive to open the doors to economic opportunity for people in Central South King County who are struggling to overcome poverty. The Venture will do this by: connecting residents with training and job opportunities; helping residents create and expand their own enterprises; helping families build wealth; and helping individuals who have gained professional skills in other countries to become certified to use those skills in our community. 3. Invest in Children and Youth — Poverty during childhood has the most significant impact on economic success in adulthood. To break the cycle of poverty, families must be able to help their children have high -quality early childhood experiences, strong relationships with the public schools, and out -of -school experiences that support social, emotional, academic and career development. The Venture will support and strengthen existing community initiatives to help the children and youth of Central South King County to learn, thrive and succeed. The Venture's role will be to focus on two phases of development: early childhood education and leaming opportunities out of school. 4. Build Strong Communities — When individuals and families develop and use their leadership abilities, they expand their potential to help each other and build a stronger community. Communities in poverty, working together, can build on their assets by developing human and social capital to address community members' needs, give voice to their concerns, and work collaboratively with organizations throughout the area. Central South King County Strategic Plan 3 The Venture will build upon the assets of communities in poverty by developing new leaders and nurturing community -based and community -driven organizations in order to develop in low-income communities a sustainable fund of human and social capital. Action Teams For each of these four strategies, the TCC formed Action Teams. Each Action Team is comprised of people struggling to overcome poverty, community -based groups, and representatives of public and private organizations who must be partners in making these strategies succeed. The Action Teams identified concrete actions they would like to pursue, and possible phases for the work. In total there are 13 actions described in the Plan. The Action Teams will decide on the steps to take first based on their first-hand experience with the issues and opportunities involved. They will then implement the actions and refine them as new opportunities arise. For example, the Action Team for Expanding Economic Opportunity has chosen first to focus on connecting residents with job opportunities by building on the success of Airport Jobs and the Apprenticeship Opportunities Program. The Action Team will add new dimensions to these programs including vocational English as a Second Language programs and the creation of "Airport University" to offer customized and targeted training opportunities at the airport. The Action Teams will seek to take advantage of these and many other opportunities for early successes. At the same time, they will do the planning that will help them tackle more difficult issues. The "informal community leaders" are an essential part of this Strategic Plan. These leaders have been crucial for the TCC's success to date. They will become the core members of the Action Team for Building Strong Communities. They will be the bridge to other leaders in communities in poverty, and between those communities and the agencies, employers, and schools and colleges that will make the plan work. For the informal community leaders —and the Venture--4o succeed, the Venture must invest in their skills and effectiveness. So the Venture will create a Multi -Cultural Leadership Institute to provide basic and advanced leadership training for the informal community leaders, the Governing Council and others involved in the Venture, as planned in Strategy 4: Build Strong Communities. Local Sponsor Once the Foundation has approved the Strategic Plan, the TCC will seek a "local sponsor" for the Venture. The TCC will request proposals from nonprofit and educational organizations to serve in this role. The sponsor will need to have credibility in the community and a solid track record of administering complex projects. The sponsor will provide administrative and fiscal management, and staff support for the Venture. Governing Council At the same time, the TCC will begin a transition toward a permanent Governing Council for the Venture. The 19—member Council will consist of 13 representatives of communities struggling to overcome poverty, and six who represent resources in the overall community. These Council members will share the vision of this Strategic Plan and have skills and resources to contribute. Working with the local sponsor, the Governing Council will oversee the Action Teams' work to carry out the action program in this Strategic Plan. The Council will have final authority for allocating resources among the Action Teams, and coordinating their efforts as a single coherent initiative. Central South King County Strategic Plan 4 Financial Plan To carry out this Strategic Plan, the TCC is requesting $10.2 million over a 10-year period. This investment will be phased. The first two years will be a start-up period. Three years of intense investment will follow. In the last five years, the Northwest Area Foundation's funds will gradually diminish, replaced by local resources. The allocation of funds varies from year to year. But overall, the TCC's plan is to dedicate Northwest Area Foundation resources as follows: • Actions to Build Community: 30% • Actions to Improve Family Stability: 15% • Actions to Expand Economic Opportunity: 15% • Actions to Invest in Children and Youth: 15% • Administration:20% • Evaluation:5% To complement the funding requested from the Northwest Area Foundation, each strategy includes a leveraging plan. These plans will raise public and private resources for specific action items. The leveraging plans identify organizations, foundations, government agencies and private corporations with interests that complement the Venture. It is premature to seek specific funding commitments at this point. But we believe the targets in this Strategic Plan to be aggressive but realistic. We estimate that more than $18.4 million in leveraged funds could come from local, state, federal, philanthropic and corporate sources during the 10-year Venture. Conclusion We believe that the Northwest Area Foundation and community team have already raised the community's energy and will to succeed. With the proposed investments and the integrity of the four strategies, the Venture can be a powerful force for change. Working together, we will substantially improve the lives of thousands of people in Central South King County and enhance the prospects of future generations in our community. Central South King County Strategic Plan 5 Y LEITCH ANNEXATION PUBLIC MEETING COUNCIL CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION WITH R-4 ZONING October 10, 2005 The City is in receipt of a 10% Notice of Intention to Commence Annexation Petition from property owners in the proposed annexation 14.6-acre area. . The subject site is within the City's Potential Annexation Area and is designated Residential Low Density (RLD) on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. It will be bordered by the City limits on its northern boundary as soon as the Mosier II Annexation is completed (estimated for around November 22nd, 2005) and lies generally between 140th Avenue SE, if extended, on the west and 143rd Avenue SE, if extended, on the east. It is bordered by SE 136th Street, if extended, on the north, and approximately SE 1381h Street, if extended, on the south (see back of this notice). Council is being asked to consider whether it wants to accept the 10% Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation Proceedings petition for the annexation, as currently proposed, whether it wants to amend the proposed boundaries, or whether it wants to reject this annexation at this time. This site currently has King County's R-4 zoning and there are eight single-family detached dwellings on it. Proposed City zoning is R-4 (4 units per net acre). This zoning allows approximately a third less density than the County's R-4 zone since the latter can be easily bonused up to 6 units per gross acre, and Renton's zoning is units per net acre. On a 15-acre site the difference would be 42 units (48 units under Renton's R-4 zoning versus 90 units under the County's R-4 zoning, with bonuses). Renton's zoning deletes critical areas and streets from a site's gross acreage whereas the County's zoning does not. Also, the County's zoning allows both attached and detached units. With the City's proposed R-4 zoning, the 14.6-acre site could accommodate approximately 46 single-family detached dwelling units, at full development. Under state law, petitions to annex are initiated by property owners representing at least 10% of the annexation area's assessed value. Council is required to hold a public meeting with the proponents within 60 days of submittal to decide whether it wishes to accept, reject or geographically modify the proposed annexation. Reviewing departments of the City consider this annexation to be a reasonable extension of their respective service areas and raised no major objections to it. If the Council decides to accept this proposed annexation, it will typically: 1. Authorize the circulation of a 60% Direct Petition to Annex, based upon assessed value; 2. Decide whether to require the simultaneous adoption of zoning upon annexation, consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map; and, 3. Decide whether to require property owners within the annexation area to assume their fair share of the City's existing indebtedness. Council Hearing Handout 10-10-05.doc\ x x . .'... rm-� t t i i th _............. aL, 1 ram_ ;0U € 77 �]( .....,,� .,..�-.,..__.,._�..�.fi:_...�..I=......,«`.P..,._.1�-zf`�,E..........,.!`3....�:�Y�"'h�t-�i,__.«..a.___-u.,_.,..-.._.._.•._.�_.�..._............. _,-, ...,, i�,.C_�'a...,._..., ..._........ ,.......... ...�.�...... ...,...------------- Proposed ! tch Fig+ure 3. Existing Structures Map sling Stru wa 1 = 3600 i�:c�nl�lure 1ka't�l�xtu:nt,�l�'i��rl'a7t;?irsutis.�:Stria�,ic C�'�ctttlettg ��. �t� N,I R-wri. .=D Proposed Annexation Area pk Council Hearing Handout 10-10-05.doc\ > a ' 1� 3T k E xro t- '4. east 14.0 opal of • ;i t lveS extended#, meted we$ of 7 � J4V@ S If ti t � .. v, x *dire- , if CxOn dd;on.he y� 13ted nur#h of SE �3 �ii extended 1 WA 2 3 { "' YtF � .,i'§, �n arr r Fil W CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: October 10, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative Report In addition to our day-to-day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week: GENERAL INFORMATION • Downtown Renton is alive with activity on Saturday, October 15'h. Visit local businesses at the Chamber of Commerce Business Expo at the Spirit of Washington Events Center from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., take part in the Harvest Festival at the Piazza from 12:00 to 5:00 p.m., and enjoy a walk along the Cedar River Trail during Renton's segment of "Walk Across Washington." Check -in for the walk begins at the Piazza at 12:00 noon, followed by a kick-off celebration beginning at 12:30 p.m., and the walk starting at 12:45 p.m. • Take part in the "Cedar River Salmon Journey" this fall, and see spawning salmon. Volunteer naturalists will be stationed from 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. at the Renton Library (100 Mill Avenue South), Cavanaugh Pond (east of Renton on the Cedar River, on Maple Valley Highway), and Landsburg Park (2760i Avenue SE in Kent) on October 15", 22nd, 23`d, and 29"'. The naturalists will discuss human and natural history of the Cedar River, salmon and their life cycle, and humanity's impact on salmon. A Spanish language program is available on October 22"d at all sites. You are invited to attend what is expected to be the largest and most comprehensive emergency preparedness event ever held in the area. Are You Ready?, a Puget Sound region emergency preparedness event, will be held at the Seattle Exhibition Hall on Friday, October 20, and Saturday, October 22"d, from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. The free event is open to the public. Workshops and speakers will be presented both days. Friday's emphasis is for working professionals and features a special workplace preparedness series. Saturday is "family day" and includes a special preparedness passport series for children. Product suppliers and experts in preparedness will be present to display and sell emergency/safety products, services and technologies. For more information, visit www.Preparedness-AreYouReady.com. In the upcoming November election, voters will vote on Initiative No. 912 concerning motor vehicle fuel taxes. This measure would repeal motor vehicle fuel tax increases of 3 cents in 2005 and 2006, 2 cents in 2007, and 1.5 cents per gallon in 2008, enacted in 2005 for transportation purposes. Initiative 912 would, over 16 years, eliminate $5.475 billion in fuel taxes and net bond proceeds, eliminating 80 percent of funding for 265 new transportation projects specified by the Legislature. About $562 million in fuel tax revenue for cities and counties - for new, local -government transportation projects over 16 years - also would be eliminated. It's important that voters are informed about all initiatives, and this November, voters are encouraged to pay close attention to Initiative 912, which relates specifically to transportation infrastructure. Administrative Report October 10, 2005 Page 2 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • The Parks Division has scheduled tree removal at Shattuck Avenue South. The first tree was removed Wednesday, October 61h and the second tree was removed on Monday, October loth. Both trees leaned severely, causing the sidewalks to buckle and crack, and posing a risk to the public. The trees will be replaced with smaller -growing Leprechaun ash trees during Spring 2006. • Beginning October loth, boat launch lanes 1 through 4 at Coulon Beach Park will be closed for construction. Global Diving, Inc., will realign the concrete ramps, install pin piles, and install metal grating over the old concrete panels. Boat launch lanes 5 through 8 will remain open to the public during the construction project, which will be completed by the end of November. • The RiverRock Grill and Alehouse, located at the City of Renton's Maplewood Golf Course, is celebrating its loth anniversary with retro menu items. Come join the fun at the All Night Party on Saturday, October 151h, and enjoy live music, food and drink specials, games, prizes, and free birthday cake. For more information, call 425-430-0311. • The RiverRock Grill and Alehouse will be closed from 4:00 p.m., Sunday, October 16th through Tuesday, October 18th, for required kitchen maintenance. The restaurant will reopen with regular operating hours on Wednesday, October 19th • Tiles commemorating veterans will be engraved during the week of October 171h through 21", weather permitting. Total number of engraved names on the memorial is 1,685; but there is room for approximately 2,300 additional names. Tile engraving at the memorial is scheduled twice a year, coinciding with Memorial Day and Veterans Day. Applications are now being accepted for the Spring 2006 engraving, which will be completed in time for Memorial Day 2006. The cost is $50 per name. To apply, download an application from the City's website or call the Community Services Department at 425-430-6600. FIRE DEPARTMENT • Last week, members of Renton's Emergency Coordination Center received training related to the pandemic flu. Members of the King County Department of Public Health presented information about the avian flu, and ECC team members from the City, Valley Medical Center, Group Health, and The Boeing Company strategized response scenarios. PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • The Washington State Department of Transportation will host an Open House on Thursday, October 131h at Renton Community Center, 1715 Maple Valley Highway, from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. for the public to provide input on proposed options for future highway safety and operational improvements along SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway). Information about the SR 167 Corridor Plan and Hot Lanes pilot project will also be available. For questions, please call 206-464-1288. • As we all know, when autumn comes, leaves fall. This can lead to clogged storm drains and flooding problems in your neighborhood. City crews do their best to keep the more than 8,000 drains clean in Renton. However, they need your help to clear the leaves and litter from the storm drains near your home. Paying close attention to storm drains located near corners and low areas can help eliminate flooding during the rainy season. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBMITTING DATA: Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk Staff Contact... Bonnie Walton SUBJECT: CRT-05-012; Court Case Estate of James Frederick Brutsche, et al v. City of Renton, Renton Police Officers Dave Adam and Craig Sjolin, et al EXHIBITS: Summons and Complaint Al #: F" 1--) 11 FOR AGENDA OF: 10/1 AGENDA STATUS: Consent.... Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance... Resolution... Old Business....... New Business...... Study Session.... Other.... RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVALS: Legal Dept...... Refer to City Attorney and Insurance Services Finance Dept.... Other........... FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment.. Amount Budgeted ........ Revenue Generated... SUMMARY OF ACTION: 0/ Summons and Complaint for Damages filed in United States District Court Western District of Washington at Seattle by John R. Muenster, 1111 Third Ave., Suite 2220, Seattle, 98101, on behalf of the Estate of James Frederick Brutsche, et al, pertaining to a police drug raid on the Brutsche family property located in the City of Kent on July 10, 2003. CITY OF RENTON ®AO 440 (Rev. 8/01) Summons in a Civil Action UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT RECEIVED (;ITY CLERK'S OFFICE WESTERN District of WASHINGTON THE ESTATE OF JAMES FREDERICK BRUTSCHE, et al., Plaintiffs, V. THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, et al., Defendants. TO: (Name and address of Defendant) The City of Renton SUMMONS IN A CIVIL CASE ` k 1 YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED and required to serve on PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY (name and address) John R. Muenster Muenster & Koenig 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 2220 Seattle, Washington 98101 cr Q, .A- t�" �e4W NUA an answer to the complaint which is served on you with this summons, within twenty (20) days after service of this summons on you, exclusive of the day of service. If you fail to do so, judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. Any answer that you serve on the parties to this action must be filed with the Clerk of this Court within a reasonable period of time after service. —LERK DATE (By) DEPUTY CLERK IzAO 440 (Rev_ 8/01) Summons in a Civil Action RETURN OF SERVICE Service of the Summons and complaint was made by me(l) DATE NAME OF SERVER (PRINT) TITLE Check one box below to indicate ap ro riate method o service ❑ Served personally upon the defendant. Place where served: ❑ Left copies thereof at the defendant's dwelling house or usual place of abode with a person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein. Name of person with whom the summons and complaint were left: ❑ Returned unexecuted: ❑ Other (specify): STATEMENT OF SERVICE FEES --TSERVICES TRAVEL 7TOTAL DECLARATION OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the united States of America that the foregoing information contained in the Return of Service and Statement of Service Fees is true and correct. Executed on Date Signature of Server Address of Server (1) As to who may serve a summons see Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. WAWD CM/ECF Version 2.4 https:Hecfwawd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/Dispatch.pl?6783859472271 Complaints and Other Initiating Documents 2:05-cv-01538-TSZ Estate of James Frederick Brutsche et al v. City of Federal Wav et al CITY OF RENTON S E P 3 0 2005 U.S. District Court RECEIVED WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON CITY CLERK'S OFFICE Notice of Electronic Filing The following transaction was received from Muenster, John Rolfing entered on 9/21 /2005 at 12:29 PM PDT and filed on 9/21/2005 Case Name: Estate of James Frederick Brutsche et al v. City of Federal Way et al Case Number: 2:05-cv-1538 Filer: James Frederick Brutsche Estate of Leo Channing Brutsche Norma Jean Brutsche Document Number: 2 Docket Text: AMENDED COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES against defendant(s) City of Auburn, Michael Jordan, Charles Jamie Sidell, City of Kent, Bob Cline, Darin Majack, Scott Rankin, Port of Seattle, Steven Courtney, Brian Torre, City of Renton, Dave Adam, Craig Sjolin, City of Tukwila, Mike Villa, Mark Renninger, King County, David McKenzie, City of Federal Way, Ryan Junker, filed by James Frederick Brutsche Estate of, Leo Channing Brutsche, Norma Jean Brutsche. (Muenster, John) The following document(s) are associated with this transaction: Document description: Main Document Original filename:n/a Electronic document Stamp: [STAMP dcecfStamp_ID=1035929271 [Date=9/21/2005] [FileNumber=1377691-0 ][lb86340e977ela6cbO488bef73d631147f9cfeaO9fe9212d9e25795d530ldOfcl46 bcc24120422c5eOfde3c6ced2e23f6451ad96cbO3fcf869aO37af6b327b36]] 2:05-cv-1538 Notice will be electronically mailed to: John Rolfing Muenster JMKK1613@aol.com, 2:05-cv-1538 Notice will be delivered by other means to: of 1 In an effort to save paper, A copy of the complete Complaint can be found at the Council Liaison's desk or in the City Clerk's office. Dept/Di v/Board.. Staff Contact...... CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL PBPW Dept/ Dev Sery Div Jan Illian, x-7216 Subject: Replacing Deferrals with Restrictive Covenants for LID Participation with a Fee -in -lieu of deferral for Street Improvements for short plats Exhibits: Issue Paper Draft Code Amendment AI #: i For Agenda of: October 10, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information........ Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to the Transportation Committee Legal Dept......... X Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: None Expenditure Required... $0 Transfer/Amendment....... $0 Amount Budgeted....... $0 Revenue Generated......... Est $120,000/yr Total Project Budget $0 City Share Total Project.. $0 SUMMARY OF ACTION: Presently street improvement deferrals for short plats are allowed with the condition that a restrictive covenant to not protest participation in a future Local Improvement District (LID) or City capital improvement project is recorded. This option would be removed, and replaced with an option to defer the street improvements subject to a fee -in -lieu to the City of the estimated costs for the deferred street improvements. These funds could be used throughout the City for pedestrian and other street related improvements. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve replacement of the existing option for deferral of street improvements for short plats with participation in fee -in -lieu -of deferred street improvements, and authorize preparation of an ordinance to be presented for first reading. PLANNINGBUILDING/ �-- PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 4, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: �„/ Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor i FROM: Gregg Zimmerman rA ministrator, PBPW Department STAFF CONTACT: Jan Illian, Engineering Specialist (x-7216) SUBJECT: Fee -in -lieu Process for Deferral of Street Improvements ISSUE: Shall the City of Renton replace the existing option for deferral of street improvements for short plats, and replace it with a deferral of the street improvements, subject to a voluntary fee -in -lieu to the City of the estimated costs for the deferred street improvements? RECOMMENDATION: Council approve the code amendments removing the option for deferral of street improvements for short plats with a restrictive covenant. Council approve code amendments creating a process for deferrals of street improvements for short plats subject to payment of a fee -in -lieu for the estimated cost of the street improvements. Sections 9 and 10 of RMC 4-9- 060C will be deleted and replaced with new fee -in -lieu language. These funds could be used throughout the City for pedestrian and other street related improvements. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Renton Municipal Code (RMC) requires street frontage improvements to be installed before a subdivision or short plat is recorded. These improvements include grading and paving of streets and alleys to the required widths, installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, monuments, sanitary and storm sewers, street lights, water mains, and street name signs. RMC 4-9-060.0 establishes rules for deferral of development improvements. There are two basic types of improvement deferrals for street improvements for short plats. The first type is the temporary deferral of certain improvements that the developer intends to install but cannot complete within the established time frame due to specific project circumstances. Fee -in -lieu Process for Deferral of Street Improvements October 4, 2005 Page 2 In order for a deferral to be granted, the developer must post an acceptable security deposit in the amount of 150% of the cost of the deferred improvements. The developer builds this type of deferred improvement within the deferral time frame and the security deposit is released to the developer. The second type of deferral is covered by RMC 4-9-060.C.9, Special Security Option for Deferral of Street Improvements. This type of deferral only applies to short plats. This type of deferral allows a restrictive covenant running with the land to be recorded in lieu of posting security. The restrictive covenant commits the property owner to not protest participation in a future Local Improvement District (LID) or City capital improvement project to install the improvements. In most cases, this type of deferral is used when the developer does not intend to install the required improvements. Four (4) conditions are listed in the RMC for this type of deferral. This option for a street improvement deferral subject to a recorded restrictive covenant was adopted for cases in which there are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is no likelihood that the improvements will be needed or required in the next five (5) years. It was recognized that a good number of developments being proposed were infill subdivisions in parts of the City lacking curbs, gutters, and sidewalks. In these neighborhoods, a short stretch of widened street with curbs, gutters, and sidewalks along the development frontage could not only look out of place, but the varying street widths could pose potential safety hazards. It was thought that the best way to build these improvements would be in one larger project initiated at some future date by the City or by LID. Small stretches of improvements likely would not fit with a larger improvement project, and in that case the improvements would have to be torn out and replaced. This type of frontage improvement deferral has been extensively used throughout the City. Please see attached Figure 7 for a map of deferred improvements prior to 2002 (more deferrals have been granted since 2002). Several concerns have been expressed about this deferral option. First, it may be difficult for the City to invoke the restrictive covenants and require residents to pay for future frontage improvements. This is because the current owners in most cases are not the developers who recorded the restrictive covenant. Although the restrictive covenant appears in the property title reports, in most cases current property owners are not willing or financially prepared to pay for the improvements. In this case, the City might eventually end up paying for the improvements rather than the developer or property owners, or due to budget constraints, the improvements may never be built. Second, use of this type of deferral has proliferated throughout the City, and in some cases it would now be beneficial to the public to have the improvements in place that were previously deferred. Third, a question of fairness can be raised in that some developers are required to conform to the subdivision frontage improvement standards at significant expense, while others are allowed to defer the cost of installing improvements to future parties. Fee -in -lieu Process for Deferral of Street Improvements October 4, 2005 Page 3 It is proposed that RMC 4-9-060.C.9 allowing restrictive covenants to be posted for development improvement deferrals be deleted from the City code. This provision would be replaced by a deferral option that would require a cash payment to be made by the developer in the amount of 100% of the cost of the improvements being deferred. A special street frontage improvement fund would be set up to receive these payments. These funds would be used by the City to build sidewalks or other street frontage improvement projects throughout the City. This would provide a means of assuring fairness for developers regarding costs of City -required improvements, and would also provide the City with financial means to build the improvements at a later date without having to require the residents to make financial contributions to the project. I� b. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ACCESS STREETS: RIGHT- OF-WAY !PAVEMENT WIDTH SIDEWALKS (OTHER 50 32 paved Parking both sides 6 sidewalk adjacent to curb both sides Combined public detention Street lighting c. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COLLECTOR STREETS: RIGHT- OF-WAY ':PAVEMENT SIDEWALKS OTHER WIDTH 36 paved Combined public 60 Parking both 5 sidewalks and 5 planting strip o!li . detention both sides sides Street lighting d. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ACCESS STREETS: RIGHT- JPAVEMENTSIDEWALKS OTHER OF -WAY WIDTH Combined public detention 60 40 paved 5 sidewalks on the property line' Street lighting S e. MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS FOR INDUSTRIAL ACCESS STREETS: RIGHT - OF -WAY WIDTH PAVEMENT WIDTH ' SIDEWALKS OTHER 66 44 paved 5 sidewalks and 5 planting strip on ' both sides Combined public detention Street lighting 3. Length of Improvements: Such improvements shall extend the full distance of such property to be improved upon and sought to be occupied as a building site or parking area for the aforesaid building of platting purposes and which may adjoin property dedicated as a public street. Renton Municipal Cooe Section 4-6-060 F. F_ PUBLIC STREET AND SIDEWALK DESIGN STANDARDS: 1. Level of Improvements: The minimum level of street improvements required depends upon the project size as listed in the following table. The project sizes listed shall be for square footage of new building and/or addition to existing buildings, number of units for apartments, or total number of final lots in lire proposed plat or short plat. ' 2. Minimum Standards: All such improvements shall be constructed to the City Standards for Municipal Public Works Construction. Standards for construction shall be as specified in the following tables, and by the Administrator or his/her duly authorized representative. a. PUBLIC STREET IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT: PROJECT RIGHT -OF- PAVEMENT SIDEWALKS AND STREET DISTANCE TO SIZE WAY WIDTH. WIDTH LIGHTING ARTERIAL 2 — 4 units residential Provide half 0 5.000 sq.As determined pavement width per Provide sidewalk on Minimum ft. by subsection standard plus project side. No 20 pavement to commercial F2 of this minimum 10 — curb street lighting arterial Section. required on project required. (500 maximum). 0 — 10,000 sq. side. ft. industrial 5-20 residential lots l 5,000 — As determined Provide full pavement; Provide sidewalk on Minimum 10,000 s R. q' by subsection width per standard — i project side_ Street 20 pavement to commercial F2 of this curb required on lighting required on arterial Section. project side, project side. (500 maximum). 10,000 — 20,000 sq. ft. industrial More than 20 units residential As determined Provide full pavement Provide sidewalk on Minimum 10,000 sq. ft- by subsection width per standard - , project side_ Street 20 pavement and commercial F2 of this curb required on lighting required on pedestrian walkway Section. project side. project side. to arterial_ 20,000 sq_ ft. industrial 4. Special Design Standards for Arterial Streets: Arterial street rights -of - way shall be sixty feet (60 ) to one hundred fifty feet (150 ) in width as may be required by the Administrator or his/her designee. The design standards for arterial streets will be established on a case -by -case basis by the Administrator or his/her designee in accordance with the major arterials and streets plan. r i 4-9-060C ture, if such course of action is deemed proper, or specified, to remove or demolish ` such dwelling, building or structure. 4. Recording of Order: If no appeal is filed from such order in the manner herein pro- vided for, then a copy of such order shall be filed with the Auditor of King County. E. VIOLATION AND PENALTIES: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2, Civil Penalties. (Ord. 4546, 7-24-1995) 4-9-060 DEFERRAL OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLATION PROCEDURES: A. PURPOSE: (Reserved) B. TEMPORARY (NINETY (90) DAY) OCCUPANCY PERMITS IN ADVANCE OF IMPROVEMENT INSTALLATION — BUILDING OFFICIAL DEFERRAL OF OFF - AND ON -SITE IMPROVEMENTS FOR OTHER THAN PLATS: 1. Applicability: A temporary occupancy - permit may be granted by the Building Offi- cial, when the required improvements have not been deferred or installed and in the opin- ion of the Building Official are not necessary for life, safety or health, or structural integrity of the buildings on the site, and the improve- ments are to be installed and completed within ninety (90) days from the date of issu- ance of temporary occupancy permit. (Ord. 4348, 5-4-1992) 2. Decision Criteria: (Reserved) 3. Security Required: In all such cases, a certified or cashier's check, letter of credit, set aside letter, or other acceptable security must be posted to the extent of one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the improvements not installed and accepted. The amount of said security shall be provided by an estimate of the applicant together with supporting data from a reputable contractor or subcontractor and based upon full engineer- ing plans. Such estimates shall be approved by the Building Official of the City; however, should the amount of the estimate be unac- ceptable to the City, the applicant shall be re- quired to provide further estimates acceptable to the City. No temporary occupancy permit shall be granted until the security amount has been established following acceptable esti- mates. 4. Expiration: Said temporary occupancy permit shall be good for a period of not more than ninety (90) days. After improvements have been installed and approved by the City the security herein shall be released and the applicant may make application for a perma- nent occupancy permit. 5. Extension of Temporary Occupancy Permit Up to One Hundred Eighty (180) Days: Should extenuating circumstances or circumstances beyond the control of the ap- plicant prevent the installation of such on -site or off -site improvements, the Building Official may extend the temporary occupancy permit to a total maximum of one hundred eighty (180) days. (Ord. 4348, 5-4-1992) C. BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS -*— DEFERRAL OF PLAT IMPROVEMENTS OR DEFERRAL OF OTHER ON- AND OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENTS BEYOND TEMPORARY OCCUPANCY PERMIT: 1. Applicability: If a developer wishes to defer certain improvements listed in this Title until after obtaining a certificate of occupancy for any structures, or in the case of plats, final plat approval, the written application shall be made to the Board of Public Works stating the reasons why such delay is necessary. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 2. Decision Criteria: (Reserved) 3. - Security Required: Upon approval by the Board of Public Works for such defer- ment, for good cause shown by the applicant, the applicant shall thereupon furnish security to the City in an amount equal to one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the installation and required improvements. The decision of the Board of Public Works as to the amount of such security shall be con- clusive. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 4. Plans for Improvements Required: Should the Board of Public Works grant the am 4-9-060C deferral of part or all of the necessary on -site improvements, then full and complete engi- neering drawings of the on -site improve- ments shall be submitted as a condition precedent to the granting of any deferral. (Ord. 3988, 4-28-1986) 5. Waiver of Requirement for Plans: Board may waive requirement of construction plans for short plat improvement deferrals. 6. Expiration: Such security shall list the exact work that shall be performed by the ap- plicant and shall specify that all of the de. ferred improvements shall be completed within the time specified by the Board of Pub- lic Works, and if no time is so specified, then not later than one year. For plats, if no time is established, then not later than one year after approval of the final plat by the City Council or one year after recording of a short subdivi- sion. The security shall be held by the Fi- nance Department. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 7. Extension of Time Limit: The Board of Public Works shall annually review the de- ferred improvements and the amount of the security. Should the Board of Public Works determine that any improvement need not be installed immediately, then the Board of Pub- lic Works may extend the deferral for an addi- tional period of time up to an additional year. Any improvement deferred for five (5) years shall be required to be installed or shall be waived by the Board pursuant to RMC 4-9-250C, Waiver Procedures, unless the Board of Public Works determines that it is more likely than not that the improvements would be installed within an additional five (5) year period of time, in which case the Board may continue to defer the improvements year to year subject to the other conditions con- tained in this Section. Should any improve- ment be initiated before the lapse of a deferral, and the work is diligently pursued, then the Board of Public Works may extend the deferral period for a term equivalent to the time necessary to complete construction, but subject, however, to continuation of the secu- rity. At the same time as the granting of any additional deferral, the security for such de- ferral shall be reviewed and increased or de- creased as the Board of Public Works shall deem necessary, but shall remain in an amount equal to a minimum of one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of the installation of the deferred improvement. (Ord. 3988, 4-28-1986) 8. Acceptable Security: Security accept- able under this Section may be cash, letter of credit, set aside letter provided that the funds cannot be withdrawn, spent, or committed to any third party, or savings account assigned to the City and blocked as to withdrawal by the secured party without the City's approval. Only if these security devices are unavailable to the applicant, or the applicant can show hardship, will the City accept a performance bond. Any security device must be payable to the City upon demand by the City and not conditioned upon approval or other process involving the applicant. Security must be un- equivocally committed to the project being secured, and cannot be available for any other purpose. Any security that, according to its terms, lapses upon a date certain, will cause the deferral to lapse on that same date unless additional adequate substitute secu- rity has been posted prior to the termination date of the prior security. Each security docu- ment posted with the City must be approved by the City Attorney, whose decision as to the acceptability of the security shall be conclu sive. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 9\ Special Security Option for Deferral f SO et Improvements: A restrictive coven t run g with the land, signed and proper re- corde after City Attorney review, may a ac- cepted security if the covenant gu antees that the p perry will join in any fut a LID es- tablished to stall the required im ovements in addition to a following con ' ions: a. There ar o similar' provements in the vicinity an ere i no likelihood that the improvement w' be needed or re- quired in the next a (5) years. b. There will b no de imental effect on the public he h, safety)Kr welfare if the improveme s are not instbJled. C. TheO is no likelihood thafthe zoning or Ian se on or adjacent to th site will Chan a to a higher classification thin a fiv 5) year period, thus increasing he li lihood that the improvements will 9-10 4-9-065A A covenant approved by the Boa f Public rks shall contain Ian ge that stipulates th operty o r will immedi- _Or ately install the de d improvements at his or her a se upon etermination of the and of Public Works t the im- vements have become necessa . Special Security Option for Short 1P Mts: A restrictive covenant running with t Ian , signed and properly recorded after ty Atto ey review, may be accepted as sec rity if the ovenant guarantees that the pro rty will joi in any future limited improvem t dis- trict est blished to install the require im- proveme is in addition to the followi g condition a. The estrictive covenant r deferrals occurs o\ano single fam' y develop- ment no an a sho plat. b. Thersimilar' provementsin theviciniere is o likelihoodthat the impros will a needed or re- quired int fiv (5) years. C. There will be ry detrimental effect on the public health, fety or welfare if the improvements a n t installed. d. There is li le like\'acent at the zon- ing or land u on or to the site will change a highicationand developm t will occa five (5) year perio , thus increlikelihood that the i provemenneeded. e. A ovenant approved by a Board shall ontain language that stip lates the pro rty owner will immediately 'nstall the eferred improvements at his or her jen seupon a determination of endof Public Works that the imp ve- nts have become necessary. (Or 4521, 6-5-1995) 11. Security Requirement Binding: The requirement of the posting of any security therefor shall be binding on the applicant and the applicant's heirs, successors and as- signs. (Ord. 3988, 4-28-1986) 12. Notification to Administrator: The Board of Public Works shall notify the Admin- istrator in writing of the following: the improve- ments deferred, amount of security or check deposited, time limit of security or check, name of bonding company, and any other per- tinent information. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 13. Transfer of Responsibility: Whenever security has been accepted by the Board of Public Works, then no release of the owner or developer upon that security shall be granted unless a new party will be obligated to per- form the work as agreed in writing to be re- sponsible under the security, and has provided security. In the instance where se- curity would be provided by a condominium owners' association or property owners' as- sociation, then it shall be necessary for the owners association to have voted to assume the obligation before the City may accept the security, and a copy of the minutes of the owners' association duly certified shall be filed along with the security. 14. Board Approval Required Prior to Transfer of Responsibility: The City shall not be required to permit a substitution of one party for another on any security if the Board of Public Works, after full review, feels that the new owner does not provide sufficient se- curity to the City that the improvements will be installed when required. 15. Proceeding Against Security: The City reserves the right, in addition to all other remedies available to it by law, to proceed against such security or other payment in lieu thereof. In case of any suit or action to en- force any provisions of this code, the devel- oper shall pay the City all costs incidental to such litigation including reasonable attor- ney's fees. The applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City requiring payment of such attorney's fees. (Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995) 4-9-065 DENSITY BONUS REVIEW: A. PURPOSE: The purpose of the density bonus review is to pro- vide a procedure to review requests for density bonuses authorized in chapter 4-2 RMC. Density bonuses are offered to meet the intent of the Comprehensive Plan policies, including but not limited to Land Use and Housing Element policies and the purpose and intent of the zoning districts. (Amd. Ord. 4985, 10-14-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) 9 - 11 (Revised 6/05) 4-9-065B B. APPLICABILITY: The density bonus review procedure and review criteria are applicable to applicants who request bonuses in the zones which specifically authorize density bonuses in chapter 4-2 RMC. This Sec- tion of chapter 4-9 RMC contains density bonus procedures and review criteria for the R-14, RM-U, COR 1, and COR 2 Zones. (Amd. Ord. 4985, 10-14-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) C. REVIEW PROCESS: 1. Concurrent Review: Density bonus re- view shall occur concurrently with any other required land use permit that establishes the permitted density and use of a site, including subdivisions, site plan review, and conditional use permits. When the development proposal does not otherwise require a subdivision, site plan review, or conditional use permit to es- tablish the permitted density of a site, but in- cludes a density bonus request, the development proposal shall be reviewed un- der administrative site plan review require- ments. 2. Reviewing Official: The Reviewing Offi- cial for the required land use permit as de- scribed in subsection C1 of this Section, Concurrent Review, shall also determine compliance with the density bonus process. 3. Submittal Requirements and Fees: An applicant shall submit applications and fees in accordance with the requirements for the primary development application per chap- ters 4-1 and 4-8 RMC. (Amd. Ord. 4985, 10-14-2002; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) (Revised 6/05) 9 - 12 Draft Code Amendment Fee -in -Lieu for Required Street Improvements 1. General — The provisions of this section establish under what circumstances the requirements of this chapter may be satisfied with a fee -in -lieu payment. 2. Authority To Grant and Duration a. If the proposed development of the subject property requires approval through a short plat approval described in the subdivision ordinance, a request for a fee -in -lieu of street improvements will be considered as part of this process under the provisions of this section. b. If granted under a short plat review process, "the fee -in -lieu is binding on the City for all development permits issued for that development under the Building Code within five (5) years of the granting of the fee -in -lieu. 3. Fee -in -Lieu of Street Improvements — This chapter establishes circumstances in which the applicant may propose to pay a fee -in - lieu of installing street improvements in the right-of-way abutting the subject property. The City will not accept the applicant's proposed fee -in -lieu if the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee determines that it is in the City's interest that the street improvements be installed abutting the subject property, taking into account such factors as the pedestrian safety impacts that result from the development. The City may accept a fee -in -lieu payment instead of requiring installation of street improvements in the following circumstances: a. If there are no similar improvements in the vicinity and there is no likelihood that the improvements will be needed or required in the next five (5) years; or b. If installation of the required improvement would require substantial off -site roadway modifications; or c. If the Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator or his/her designee determines that installation of the required improvement would result in a safety hazard; or d. If other unusual circumstances preclude the construction of the improvements as required. 1 Agreements for Fee -in -Lieu of Street Improvements 1. General — The provisions of this chapter establish the circumstances under which the applicant may propose and the City may accept a fee -in -lieu of installing a street improvement in the right-of-way abutting the subject property. 2. Amount of Fee -in -Lieu — In each instance where the City approves a proposed fee -in -lieu under the provisions of this section, the amount of the fee -in -lieu shall be 100 percent of the then estimated cost of constructing the street improvements that would otherwise be required under this chapter, based on information compiled and kept current by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department on the cost of street improvement construction. 3. Use of Fee -In -Lieu Funds — In each instance where the City accepts a fee -in -lieu of installing a street improvement under the provisions of this section, the City shall deposit those funds into a reserve account and expend the funds collected within five (5) years of the date collected to fund other pedestrian safety improvements in the City. 4. No Further Obligation from the Property — In each instance where the City accepts a fee -in -lieu of installing street improvements, the subject property will not be subject to participation in future street improvement costs (along the property frontage) unless redevelopment occurs to a more intense land use than what was occurring on the property at the time of the fee -in -lieu payment. 4 I Legend Ordinan D D C1 C R H� N a A fa (S SW43$ti - TRANSPORTATION PLANNING & ENGINEERING, INC. (D p A S S �c I AT F.S UAPmj-a \Ran23nWentondefw"6mxd TP 04-MO Citizen Referrals & Board of Public Works Deferrals Figure Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study 7 City of Renton CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al #: 4 ` Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division Staff Contact...... Arneta Henninger X7298 Subject: CHERIE FINAL PLAT File NO.: LUA 05-073FP (Preliminary Plat LUA 03- 110) Exhibits: 1. Resolution and legal description 2. Staff report and Recommendation Sept. 30, 2005 Recommended Action: Council concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Amount Budgeted....... Total Project Budget N/A For Agenda of: October 10, 2005 Agenda Status Consent..............X Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution ............ X Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information......... Approvals: Legal Dept ......... X Finance Dept...... Other ............... Transfer/Amendment....... Revenue Generated......... City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The recommendation for approval of the referenced final plat is submitted for Council action. This final plat subdivides 4.98 acres into 16 single family residential lots with water, sanitary sewer, storm drainage, street lighting, curb and gutter, sidewalks and street improvements. Design and construction of utilities, lighting and pavement will be approved, accepted or deferred (and a security device posted) as required through the Board of Public Works prior to recording the plat. All conditions placed on the preliminary plat by the City of Renton will be met prior to recording the plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve the Cherie Lane Final Plat, LUA 05-07317P, with the following conditions and adopt the resolution. 1. All plat fees shall be paid prior to recording the plat. 2. All plat improvements shall be either constructed or deferred to the satisfaction of City staff prior to recording the plat. L\Templates\AGN BHP11.doc/ CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (CHERIE LANE; FILE NO. LUA-05-073FP). WHEREAS, a petition for the approval of a final plat for the subdivision of a certain tract of land as hereinafter more particularly described, located within the City of Renton, has been duly approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, after investigation, the Administrator of the Planning/BuHding/Public Works Department has considered and recommended the approval of the final plat, and the approval is proper and advisable and in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools, schoolgrounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of the subdivision and dedication; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION IL The final plat approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department pertaining to the following described real estate, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth RESOLUTION NO. (The groperty, consisting of approximately 4.98 acres, is located in the vicinity of S. 35 Street and Wells Ave. S.) is hereby approved as such plat, subject to the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton, and subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department dated September 30, 2005. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of 2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES. I 135 :10/05/05 : ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2 CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE WA 98007 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Core Project No: 03090A 04/13/05 THE SOUTH HAI.,F OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE NORTH 330 FEET; ALSO EXCEPT THE EAST 660 FEET. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION BUILDING/PLANNING/PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF RENTON STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPLICANT: LOCATION: SUMMARY OF REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION: Mackenzie River Homes Cherie Lane Final Plat (Preliminary Plat LUA 03-11OPP) File: LUA 05-073FP S 35 St and Wells Ave S Section 29, Twp. 23 N. Rng. 5 E. Final Plat for 16 single family residential lots with water, sewer, storm, streets and lighting. Approve With Conditions FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record documents in this matter, staff now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. The applicant, Mackenzie River Homes, filed a request for approval of a 16 lot Final Plat. The yellow file containing all staff reports, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit No. 1. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, issued a Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated on January 7, 2004, for the subject proposal. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. The subject site is located at S 35th St and Wells Ave S. The new plat is located in Section 29, Twp. 23 N. Rng. 5 E. The subject site is a 4.98 acre parcel. The Preliminary Plat received City of Renton Council approval on April 12, 2004. The property is located within the R-8. The Final Plat complies with both the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. 10. The Preliminary Plat was subject to a number of conditions as a result of both environmental review and plat review. 'The applicant has complied with the conditions imposed by the F.RC: 1. The applicant shall install a silt fence along the downslope 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 1).4.3.1 of the King County Surface Wuter Design Xfanual, Appendix 1). This will be required during the construction of both off site and on -site improvements as well as building construction. The required fence has been installed. 2. Shallow drainage swales shall be constructed to intercept surface waterflow low and route the flow awav from the construction area to a stabilized discharge point. Vegetation growth shall be established in the ditch by seeding or placing sod. Depending on site grades, it may be necessary to line the ditch with rock to protect the ditch from erosion and to reduce flow rates. The design and construction of'drainage swales shall conform to the specifications presented in Section 4.4.1 of the King County Surfuc•e !Water Design Manual. Temporary pipe systems can also be used to convey stormwater across the site. This will be required during the construction of both off site and on -site improvements as well as building construction. The required drainage swales have been constructed. 3. The project contractor shall perfbrm 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. This measure has been satisfied by the project contractor. 4. l+l%ekly 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 gI'the plat. This measure has been satisfied by the developer. 5. The applicant shall fill all sinkholes located on the site with compacted soils. All sinkholes have been filled and compacted. 6. The development shall not place any building structures, storm water detention facilities, roads or utilities within the designated high hazard areas, and shall be restricted from the use of mine rock fill containing more than 20% coal by weight as structural fill. The satisfaction of these requirements shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division throughout the duration of site preparation and building construction activities This measure has been satisfied by the completion of construction of the approved engineering plans and action taken by the Development Services Division. The development shall place all structures a minitnum of 15 feet from the lligh Coal Mine Hazard area boundary as depicted on the plat. A note shall be placed on the face of the plat stating this requirement. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. This measure has been satisfied by the completion of construction of the approved engineering plans and action taken by the Development Services Division. The required note has been added to the Final Plat. CHFRIEI .ANRFP.DO('/ 8. The applicant shall install permanent fencing (i.e. split rail or other approved barrier) with signage at visible locations around the perimeter of the high coal mine hazard area and as it extends into Lots 14, 15 and 16 in order to provide adequate notice to residents or visitors that there are known coal mine hazards in this area. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. The required fencing and signage has been installed. 9. The applicant shall place a note on the face of the plat, as well as record a restrictive covenant, subject to the review and approval of the City Attorney and the Property Services Section, prior to the recording of the final plat which states the following: COAL MINE HAZARD NOTICE The lots created herein fall within a coal mine hazard area as identified by a Geotechnical Engineer at the time of this subdivision. Presence of such a hazard may trigger mitigation measures at the time of construction. No structures or improvements shall occur within high hazard areas. The required note has been added to the Final Plat. The separate covenant shall be provided by the developer. 10. The applicant shall record a restrictive covenant to run with the land that states the developer and all future home owners will hold the City harmless from any damages occurring from land movement, slide, collapse or other similar event caused by the coal mines known to exist beneath the site. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division and the City Attorney prior to the recording of the final plat. This has been noted on the Final Plat. The separate covenant shall be provided by the developer. 11. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations contained within the Wetland Evaluation Report, dated November 13, 2003, as prepared by AlderNW in regards to wetland maintenance, monitoring and construction of the project. All required recommendations have been complied with. 12. During site preparation and construction of improvements and residences, the applicant shall install silt fencing with brightly colored construction flags to indicate the boundaries of the wetland area and buffer. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. The required fencing has been installed. 13. After the development of roadway and utility improvements, the applicant shall install permanent fencing (i.e. split -rail fence or other approved barrier) and signage along the entire edge of the wetland buffer to denote the critical area. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. The required fencing and signage have been installed. 14. The applicant shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Drainage Manual Level 2 Flow Control for the project. The approved engineering plans have been prepared to comply with these requirements. CHERIELANEFP. DOC/ 15. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee based on a rate of $488.00 per new single-family lot. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. The required fee will be paid by the developer prior to the recording of the final plat. 16. The applicant shall provide the necessary means of access to serve the development. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. Access has been provided. 17. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip associated with the project. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. The required fee will be paid by the developer prior to the recording of the final plat. 18. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single family lot. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. The required fee will be paid by the developer prior to the recording of the final plat. 11. In addition, the applicant has complied with the conditions imposed as a result of Preliminary Plat: 1. The applicant shall submit a revised PMT (8-112 x 11 reduction of the plat that complies with the development standards. The revised PMT shall be submitted prior to the recording of the final plat to the development Service Division. The required revised PMT reductions of the plat have been included with this first submittal. 2. The applicant shall indicate on the face of the final plat the orientation of the front yard and side yards along a street for Lot 1 with the front yard facing the north property line (having the attached garage accessed from the north) and the west property line be the side yard along a street. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of Development Servicers Division prior to the recording of the final plat. Restriction No. 1 on Sheet 2 of the final plat addresses this condition. The following lots are required to utilize their respective access easement: a) Lots S and 6; and b) Lots 13 and 14. The condition shall be placed on the face of the final plat. Restriction No. 2 on Sheet 2 of the final plat addresses this condition. 4. The portion of the plat property, lying northwesterly of the street right-of-way for South 35th Street abutting the cul-de-sac, shall become part of the street right-of-way dedication. The satisfaction of this requirements is subject to the review and approval of Development Services Division. The area in question has been included in the area to be dedicated as public right-of-way, as shown on the final plat. CHF.RI1 LANUP.DOCI 5. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements within this development. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to the recording of the short plat. This condition shall be met by action taken by the developer. Copies of the Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions have been submitted to the City along with this first submittal of the final plat. 6. Sanitary sewer service will be from the Soos Creek Water and sewer District. The applicant will need a written confirmation that sewer service will be available as soon as possible. Sanitary sewer service will be taken from the Soos Creek Water and Sewer District's sanitary sewer facilities currently being constructed, according to the approved construction plans following the completion of construction and approval from Soos Creek. The developer shall provide a letter of availability. The Final Plat generally appears to satisfy the conditions imposed by the preliminary plat process and therefore should be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the Final Plat with the following conditions: 1) All plat improvements shall be either constructed or deferred to the satisfaction of City staff prior to the recording of the plat. 2) All fees shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. SUBMITTED THIS 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2005 DEVEL MENT SER ICES DIVISIO CHERIELANEFP.DOC/ CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE WA 98007 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Core Project No: 03090A 04/13/05 THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE NORTH 330 FEET; ALSO EXCEPT THE EAST 660 FEET. 167 515 0 p CEDAR A W SE SITE 174th S ro� r� 176th Sr R� Q OP CHERIE LANE FINAL PLAT VICINITY MAP Con N%� DESIGN ENGINEERING PAGE iOF1 14711 NE 2ft Place, # 101 Bellevue, WashkVton 99007 42"85.7877 Fox 425.8859963 PLANNING • SURVEYING Cl- OF 8 7 S. 34TH ST� N88'23'50"E - - 121.99 - - 127.53 - \ 121.98 MEA. 127.58 MEA. w FOUND 4" CONCRETE MONUMENT co WITH PUNCHED 1 3/4" BRASS DIDK, !o rn TRACT A DWN. 0.3' IN MONUMENT CASE `r N 4 TRACT "A" i CITY OF RENTON 0.1'E.XO.3'N. OF INTERSECTION z V SHORT PLAT NO. LUA-98-026-SHPL w REC. NO. 9812289012 N88.39'49"E 122.03 - co 00 m 0) �Q S. 34TH PL 656.37 vi 10 32 0 Z z Q = 000 i n 12 11 J 9 N 33 � J M M 8 34 ` a 16 15 14 13 J d TRACT A 7 35 w w (D N !to S. 35TH ST. o CN 6 00 36 t[) d- p O Z 1 2 3 4 5 Z 37 -F N88'03'11 "E 657.23 N 29 CEDAR AVENUE 28 W , NO. 2 PG'050 6000 , I >Q REC, N0. 20050506000287 TRACT A _ I V� 30 35 TRACT B 27 1C A AF15 L 0 V C F C. LL d N d CITY O1: RENTON COUNCIL AGEND Al #: i r Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of: October 10, 2005 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 for the Ridgeview Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Court Plat LUA-04-131. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Deed of Dedication Study Sessions...... Exhibit Map Vicinity Map Information......... I learing Examiner's Reports Recommended Action: Approvals: Council concur- Legal Dept......... X Finance Dept...... X Other ............... Fiscal Impact: N/A Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget City Share Total Project. SUNINIARY OF ACTION: Accept dedication of an additional 17.5 feet of right-of-way for the widening of Bremerton Avenue NE located on the eastern boundary of the Ridgeview Court Plat, LUA04-131, property. This dedication is a condition of the plat, which was approved by City Council on May 9, 2005. The dedication of this right-of-way fronting Ridgeview Court is also a condition for the recording of the Elmhurst Final Plat, LUA05-090, which abuts the Ridgeview Court property to the south. In an effort to coordinate the construction of these developments and to meet the conditions of these two final plats, Council acceptance of said right-of-way is requested. STAFF RECOMMF,NDA,rION: Staff recommends that Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Deed of Dedication. C v.1>oruiurnt" tild Srtune.,`,nincunisnnALuca) ScII111" \ I'cnipTI'k-'c%icw Court Plat IIIAG0AGNBII 1 , Return Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 DEED OF DEDICATION Property Tax Parcel Number: 518210-0042 Project File #: Street Intersection: Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. Rid eview Court L.L.C. 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation LEGAL DESCRIPTION: (Abbreviated or full legal must go here. Additional legal on page ) The East 17.50 feet of the following parcel. The south half of the east half of the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 15, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in King County, Washington; EXCEPT all coal and mineral rights as contained in reservation of record, and known as a portion of Tract 4, of Martin's Acre Tracts, EXCEPT the east 7.5 feet of the said tract. 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. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and seal the day and year as written below. Approved and Acce ed By: Grantor(s): Grantee(s): City of Renton 44 Mayor City Clerk CORPORATE FORM OF STATE OF ) )SS ACKNOWLEDGMENT Notary Seal must be within box COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 1,-')_F ZA is the person who appeared before me and said person acknowledged that bL signed this instrument, authoried to exxecute the instwas instrument and acknowledged it as the • L�'" �? t 2 Q A•- LLC a ��'► ? LI:�C.zS � r �+ ,r.� °nf"t�w r?+, vti► , to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the use and purposes mentioned in the instrument. �� Oti ` Dated:, % 005 (Signature) t \\ ^- ^_ j V -DIC A Print Notary Na/1P Name: A Residing at: \ �fC� tY\< l�1 �J My appointment expires: VS - ,—`7 ' U Exhibit A Legal Description THE EAST 17.50 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING PARCEL. THE SOUTH HALF OF THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT ALL COAL AND MINERAL, RIGHTS AS CONTAINED IN RESERVATION OF RECORD, AND KNOWN AS A PORTION OF TRACT 4, OF MARTIN'S ACRE TRACTS, AN UNRECORDED PLAT; EXCEPT THE EAST 7.5 FEET OF THE SAID TRACT. 9L� 7/30/ ��� EXHIBIT MAP January 25, 2005 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: Cliff Williams, PE PO Box 2401 Kirkland, WA 98083 Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 04-131, PP, SA-H, ECF LOCATION: 327 Bremerton Avenue NE SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for Site Plan, Preliminary Plat and Code Modification for subdividing a 2.4-acre site into 20 lots for development of single-family dwellings. SUMMARY OF ACTION. Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on December 28, 2004. 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 January 4, 2005 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, January 4, 2005, at approximately 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No. 4: Preliminary Site Plan Exhibit No. 5: Revised Site Plan showing 26' Private Access and Utility Easement Exhibit No. 6: Topography Map Exhibit No. 7: Tree Cutting/Clearing Plan Exhibit No. 8: Landscaping Plan 4 '1 . Ridges ie�� Court Preliminary Plat File No-_ HJA-0,1 131, PP, SA-H, E(T January 25, 2005 Page 2 ------------------------------------- Exhibit No. 9: Grading Plan -- Exhibit No. 10: -- Utility Plan Exhibit No. 11: Elevation Plan for Lots 5, 6, 15 & 16 Exhibit No. 12: Elevation Plan for Lots 2 & 20 Exhibit No. 13: Elevation Plan for Lots 3, 9 & 12 Exhibit No. 14: Elevation Plan for Lot 13 Exhibit No. 15: Elevation Plan for Lots 10 & 18 Exhibit No. 16: 17 Elevation Plan for Lots 4, 71 8, 14 & Exhibit No. 17: Elevation Plan for Lots 1, 11 & 19 Exhibit No. 18: Zoning Ma The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Nancy Weil, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The site is located south of NE 4"' Street and to the west of Bremerton Avenue NE. Approval for site plan, preliminary plat for 20 lots on a 2.4- acre site for the eventual development of single-family dwellings. Access to this site off of Bremerton, which will require improvements, is proposed by a public street (NE, 3rd Lane) to end in a cul-de-sac plus additional easements that will radiate from that cul-de-sac. There are no protected critical areas and it is vested to the development regulations for the Center Suburban (CS) zoning and is located in the Centers Residential Bonus District B. The zoning did change in November of 2004, however the filing for this preliminary plat was before the changes and so is vested to the CS zone. The current zoning is CN. Two street modifications were requested and approved, one a reduced right-of-way width of 42 feet and second a reduced'radius on the cul-de-sac of 50 feet. Three private access easements will extend off of NE 3`1 Lane to serve access to all 20 lots. Lots 9 — 13 will have rear entry garages with front of each lot facing east with an 18- foot pedestrian access to the front of those lots. The site is relatively flat with a berm located near the southeast corner of the site. There is some loose fill but has been deemed suitable for the proposed development. The site is vegetated with blackberry bushes, small deciduous and coniferous trees which are to be removed as part of the site preparation. An additional modification from the Suburban Centers Residential Bonus District B would allow greater front yard setbacks for lots 8 through 13 rather than the maximum 15 feet permitted in the CS zone. ;i, The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated (DNS-M) with seven mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. The preliminary plat criteria for the Comprehensive Plan Designation was in compliance for this development. The minimum yard area provided would comply with the land area per dwelling unit. There are no minimum requirements for lot width or depth within the CS zone. All lots meet the maximum lot coverage of 65%. The proposal meets all the setback requirements. The net density of 12.42 dwelling units per acre is within the allowed density range of the CS zone. Based on the building elevations provided by the applicant, the proposed residential structures would comply with, or possibly exceed the requirements of Bonus District B of the Centers Residential Overlay. There are seven elevations for this site, all are two-story with rear or side entrance garages. Landscaping, access and parking meet or exceed the requirements of the Bonus District B and are in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Ridgeview Court Pichininary Plat Filc No_: LUA-04 I31, PP, SA-H, F,CF January ?5, 200 i Pane i The lot arrangements as well as size, shape and orientations are all in compliance, meeting the minimum width and area requirements. The lots are at 90-degree angles, some of the structures will be facing a different direction, they seem to flow well. There will be no direct vehicular access onto Bremerton from any of the proposed lots. The applicant is required to dedicate right-of-way for the improvement for Bremerton Avenue. Twenty-four feet is currently shown for the private access easement, staff has discussed this with the applicant and they are in agreement that this could be reduced to function more as a private alleyway, which allows a minimum of 16 feet in width with 14 feet of pavement. As long as 24-feet of back out area is provided for each garage, the staff feels that the reduced width of the street will lend itself to an alleyway residential look rather than Splitting up the tier of lots_ This also gives a larger yard area to those lots. Staff recommends the establishment of a homeowner's association or maintenance agreement for the landscaped right-of-way improvements, as well as for any shared private utilities/drainage facilities or private access and utility easements and to include the private pedestrian access easement. The surrounding properties to the west, north and east are zoned CS. To the south is a proposed single-family residential development with existing single-family to the southeast in R-8 zoning. Anacortes Avenue NE will act as a buffer between the proposed single-family homes along the western property line and the existing commercial use (Post Office site) on the abutting property. Traffic, Fire and Park mitigation fees -were imposed by the F.RC. The subject site is located within the Renton School District and they have indicated that they can handle the proposed 8 new students from the new development. The site is located within the Cedar River Basin. The applicant has submitted a Drainage Report that indicates that on -site surface water would be directed to a stormwater detention facility located in the southwest corner of the site. The drainage analysis and design of the stormwater system appears to be in accordance with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual Level 2 flow control requirements. The project will require the installation of new water mains, fire hydrants, fire control systems, and meters, all to be placed within City held easements. The project would require a new sewer main along the site frontage and new sewer mains as required to serve the new single-family lots. In regards to the Site Plan Criteria, the project is in compliance with the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. Land use regulations with modifications are in compliance as well. The seven house plans for the 20 lots are sufficient to lend variation to the project. This site will also blend with the commercial, mixed use and transition well into the residential uses to the south. This development should not have any negative impacts to the surrounding property owners. The site does require clearing and all existing structures to be removed. Staff recommends approval of the Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat subject to conditions. Cliff Williams, 5326 SW Manning Street, Seattle, WA 98116 stated that he is an employee of the developer and they are satisfied with the recommendations that the City has provided_ Kevin Chamberlin, 18930 45°i Place NE, Lake Forest Park, WA 98155, manager of the Renton Highlands Station of the US Postal Service that will be adjacent to Lots 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13. This use for that property Ridgeview Court Preliminary Flat File No.: L UA-04-131, PP, SA-I1, F.CF January 25, 2005 Page 4 will be a great improvement for the neighborhood, however, the Post Office will have an impact on them. There are semi -tractor trailer rigs that come into the property at all hours of the day and night. They all enter and leave through a driveway that will take them next the above -mentioned lots. It is most likely that these people will feel an impact from this traffic. Some of the trailers come in as early as 1:00 am in December and at 3:15 am the rest of the year. They continue at intervals throughout the day along with a lot of other truck traffic. There is a gravity operated dock plate system (used to unload the trucks) that makes quite a bit of noise and it cannot be modified in any way. There also are 39 delivery vehicles that are required to be inspected each morning between 6:30 and 7:30 am. Part of the vehicle inspection is a short sounding of the horn. (Mr. Chamberlin drew the location of the delivery trucks on the vicinity map) Bob Wenzl, 636 Lake Sammamish Lane NE, Bellevue, WA 98008 stated that he is the owner of Ridgeview Court LLC. He is completely aware of the post office site there, he knows where most of the vehicles and work that will be going on in that neighborhood. It is anticipated that the property to the north will be a commercial type of zone. They are confident that the post office and the new residents will make good neighbors. Juliana Fries, Development Services the report given is accurate and the Level 2 Storm Water detention is adequate. The Examiner stated that it would be necessary to address the post office concerns, the developer may be comfortable with the situation, but the future buyers of these homes may not. What enhancements car,. be provided? Ms. Weil pointed out besides the difference in the grade and the 26-foot easement the structures to first be impacted will be the garages. Bedrooms will be upstairs, looking over the garages and subject to the noises that could be generated at 1:00 am and 3:00 am. Once property owners take possession of the property, they may wish to enhance that back area, no additional requirements have been made for landscaping. No additional fencing has been required along this property line, but certainly it could be done. Mr. Wenzl stated that they had no concerns about providing a fence or some kind of hedge screening if the space is available. A 6-foot fence would be appropriate. Again there is the elevation change from the parking lot approximately a 6 to 10-foot drop from their parking structures to the large rockery along that easterly property line. 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 approximately 9:48 a.m. ° FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: l . The applicant, Ridgeview Court, LLC, filed a request for a Site Plan Review approval and a 20-lot Preliminary Plat. There was also a request to modify the front yard setback for homes in the project. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #f l . 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-131, PP, SA-H, ECF January 25, 2005 Page 5 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 327 Bremerton Avenue NE. The subject site is located on the west side of Bremerton Avenue a half -block south of NE 4th Street. Union Avenue NE is located west of the subject site. 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan was changed in November 2004. The area in which the subject site is located was designated for the development of Commercial Center uses but is now, designated for Commercial Corridor. 7. Policy H-90 states: "Identify sites within mixed -use areas, which are appropriate for residential developments." Policy H-85 states: "Provide homeownership opportunities in all neighborhoods." The subject site is currently zoned CN (Center Neighborhood) but was zoned CS (Center Suburban) when the application was submitted. The applicant is vested under the prior regulations which allow a density of 10 to 20 units per acre for residential development. The minimum lot area for single family uses in the prior CS zone were 1,200 square feet of which 250 square feet must be landscaped yard. The subject site was also located in the Area B Suburban Centers Residential Demonstration District and is governed by additional Site Plan Review criteria. 9. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 1480 enacted in April 1954. 10. The subject site is approximately 2.4 acres or 104,373 square feet. It is almost square and is approximately 330 feet wide (north to south) along Bremerton and 316 feet deep. l l . The subject site is relatively level with a berm in the southeast corner where slopes range from 15 to 24 percent. The berm appears to be a result of grading on the adjacent parcel of land. The site -is also approximately eight (8) feet higher than the adjacent parcel to the west. 12. The area contains a mix of uses and undeveloped property. The relatively new Post Office is located directly west of the north half of the subject site. 13. The applicant proposes removing all vegetation, blackberry, and deciduous and conifer trees from the subject site to allow development of the building pads, roads and driveways. The applicant may import approximately 4,800 cubic yards of fill material to grade the site and roads. 14. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 20 single-family lots that will contain detached single-family homes. The lots will be arranged around a series of private roads, alley -like roads and easements that originate from a new roadway that terminates in a cul-de-sac. Basically, a series of dead end roads will be created off of a dead end cul-de-sac. Ridgeview Court Preliminary Hat File No.: Lt)A-04-131, PP, SA-N, ECF January 25, 2005 Page 6 15. Administrative approval was granted to allow the cul-de-sac street's width to be reduced to 42 feet and the radius of the cul-de-sac to be reduced to 50 feet. Staff noted that the applicant would have to Cdedicate 17.5 feet to the widening of Bremerton which currently does not meet City standards. 16. The three private easernents will extend north and south from the new cul-de-sac street. 74)e proposed lots along Bremerton, Proposed Lots 1-3 and 18-20 would take their access off the first of these easements rather than Bremerton. These lots would be rear -loaded from this alley_ Proposed Lots 4-7 and 14-17 would use the second of the easements. Lots would face each other across this easement roadway (see attached maps). Finally, a new private street, labeled Anacortes Avenue NE, would provide access to Proposed Lot 8 and the storm drainage tract on the south and Proposed Lots 9-13 on the north. Staff has recommended that the 24-foot private street paralleling the rear of homes that front Bremerton be reduced to a 16-foot alley width with 14 feet of paving and 24-feet of backout space to decrease impervious surface and create a private street appearance. 17. The density for the plat would be 12.42 dwelling units per acre after subtracting roadway areas. 18. The homes would be two -stories. The dwelling or building groupings would vary from those along Bremerton being traditional facing a street, to the interior groupings facing a kind of courtyard private street, to those in the rear facing an interior street. Sidewalks could connect all of the units to one another and through the private easements to the public street. 19. The CS zone permits a lot coverage of 65% whereas a lot coverage of not more than 44% is proposed for this complex. A front yard setback of between 10 and 15 feet is required. Staff has granted a modification that allows a setback for Proposed Lots 8 to 13 to have a greater setback to allow pedestrian access and rear access garages on a 26-foot wide private street. A minimum side yard of 3 feet with no projections is required unless there is abutting residential zoning. The R-10 district south of the subject site will require a 15-foot setback on Proposed Lots 1, 5, 6 and 8. 20. The District B overlay guidelines require building forms to contain both vertical and horizontal modulations at a minimum width of 2 feet at intervals of 40 feet as well as individual private entry features. It appears that the buildings will comply with these requirements. Two enclosed parking spaces that open onto a non -front facade and away from arterial streets will be provided as required. 21. The applicant will be providing the required 250 feet of landscaped area on each lot. Landscaping will consist of lawn, and a mix of conifer and deciduous trees and shrubs. �0 22. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 8 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 23. The development will increase traffic approximately 200 vehicle trips per day and add approximately 20 trips to each peak hour travel period. 24. Stormwater would be contained in the southwest corner of the subject site in Tract A. The plat would comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual, Level 2 flow requirements. 25. Sewer and water would be provided by the City. Appropriate extensions of the water and sewer mains would be required. Ridgeview Court Pichrni im-v flat File No.: 1,1 JA 04 1 11, PP- tiA 11, F(T January 25, 2005 Page 7 26. The Manager of the adjacent Post Office testified that the post office has 39 delivery vehicles. Postal employees start-up each of the 39 vehicles and test their horns between 6:30 A.M. and 7:30 A.M. Ile also testified that large tractor trailer rigs arrive at the post office site at 1:00 A.M_ during the month of December and 3:15 A.M. the rest of the year, as well as other hours during a 24-hour day. They arrive near the rear of the post office site which would place them along the western or rear edge of the subject property. They can make quite a lot of noise as they park and then depart as well as during their loading or unloading operations in which gravity activated dock plates are used (while this was not spelled out, it appears that rather than use some potentially quiet hydraulic system, the large plates merely fall and clang into place). large trucks also may have backup beepers as safety equipment. During busier seasons such as Christmas there can be quite a lot of nighttime traffic at the site_ Ile expressed his concerns that residents of the subject site's new dwellings would be disturbed by the noise, especially during what would normally be sleep hours. He does not want to have to deal with complaints that he is sure will be generated by the normal post office operations if residential housing is constructed so close to the post office. }le did support a change to the neighborhood from development but was concerned about the impacts noise would have on the proposed single-family homes. 27. The applicant indicated that they were aware of the noise issue and that they believe distance, approximately 40 to 50 feet between the roadway and setbacks, as well as a grade separation oupled with a fence and landscaping will minimize any problems with noise disturbing residents. CONCLUSIONS: Preliminary Plat First, this proposal includes two components. The first one is a Preliminary Plat on which this office makes a recommendation to the City Council. The second component is a Site Plan review since the proposed plat will be used for single-family detached homes and is, therefore, governed by the Centers Residential Bonus District B. This office finds itself in a difficult role in making a recommendation to the City Council on this project. The proposed plat that will allow single family uses on the subject site does not appear to serve the public use and interest. Under those circumstances, the proposed plat should be denied by the City Council. The compelling issue in this case is one of untoward noise or noises at a time or actually, times of day, when they are or can be exceptionally disturbing. The representative of the Post Office has indicated that uses on the post office site are almost completely incompatible with a residential qualityoflife. Tractor trailer rigs and other large trucks and vans will be coming and going from the post office site during all hours of the day and night. The trucks are loud. Backup beepers may be employed. Truck and post office doors will be opening and closing during various operations. These aspects of the neighboring uses make use of the subject site for single family or any residential use problematic. 3. At the same time, free-market concepts suggest that a property owner should be able to do what they want with their property. But in this case the current owner would develop homes and sell those homes to third parties who may not be in a position to know about the potential impacts created by the adjacent post office. The City has an obligation to make sure that it does not allow incompatible uses to be developed adjacent to one another. That is one of the primary purposes of Zoning and Land Use regulations. It does not necessarily matter if the parties may agree to such uses. There is an overriding public policy that governs such matters. 1n this case, the current developer may be well -aware, as he states, of the nature of the adjacent uses but that does not mean some innocent purchaser who views the properties during daylight, or even during the evening will be made aware of traffic and noises that erupt in the dead of night, between 1:00 A_M. to 3:00 A.M. Not everyone visits their potential Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: H IA-04-131, PP, SA-t 1, FCF January 25, 2005 Page 8 neighborhood at such hours or even perhaps at 6:30 A.M. when postal delivery trucks are started, tested and horns sounded. This is certainly one of those situations that calls for a transition from more intense, in this case 24-hour uses, to less intense uses. The subject site might be more suitable for a commercial or office use. It does not appear suitable for a single-family use. A mere fence or wall and landscaping even coupled with some distance will not provide sufficient buffering to make it easy to sleep during periods of heavy activity at the adjacent site. Noise that might fade into the ambient noises of a vibrant neighborhood during the day can be extremely disturbing or disruptive when those noises occur during very quiet times. The City certainly does not want its future residential homes to be blighted by the adjacent uses. Usually, the question is the opposite - that the development will not create blight and will rectify blight. But the impacts from next door cannot be ignored. They cannot but have a negative impact on the quality of life for anybody living adjacent to the post office. The Comprehensive Plan contains Policy H-90. That policy requires the City to: "Identify sites within mixed -use areas, which are appropriate for residential developments." While Policy H-85 states: "Provide homeownership opportunities in all neighborhoods." These policies are not necessarily conflicting and H-85 should not be read to say that residential uses have to be provided everywhere in all neighborhoods. Context is still important. The overriding concern should be to identify appropriate sites where residential development is appropriate. Should an undesirable housing situation be created where sleep patterns would be disturbed by the arrival of larger tractor trailer rigs in the middle of the night or twice during the night? Should residents automatically be awakened whether they want to be or not by postal employees starting up 39 vehicles and testing their horns between 6:30 A.M. and 7:30 A.M. six days a week? If populations in the area increase, will there be a commensurate increase in delivery trucks being tested at that time of the morning? Will residents be able to sleep through the noises, said to be quite loud, of gravity operated dock plate systems at 1:00 A.M. or 3:00 A.M. when deliveries occur? It seems that the proposed location is not one of those "mixed -use areas, which are appropriate for residential developments." 0 6. Of course, one could cynically conclude that the deleterious nature of the post office's use would result in the single-family homes being priced more modestly, thereby creating a new stock of more affordable homes. There is also an issue which this office cannot truly address of whether the post office's use might in fact constitute a nuisance that adversely affects the applicant's use of their property. The nature of the City Zoning Code though plays a part when it allows potentially disparate uses adjacent to one another. But that is where the City's discretion in regulating, limiting or conditioning uses comes into play. While the Zoning under which the applicant seeks approval permits single family uses in this mixed -use area, it does not mandate they be permitted. It would allow such use only after considering the site and its surroundings. Analysis needs to be done. The Code does not mandate that these uses be crafted abutting each other. First, one has to consider whether the plat and site plan are in the public use and interest. This office has to conclude that, as now proposed, the public use and interest is not served by the proposal. 7. Based on the above analysis, the recommendation, hard as it is to reach, is that the City Council should deny the proposed Preliminary Plat. Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: l .11A 04 1 i l , PP, SA I -I_ V( January )S, 2005 Page 9 If on the other hand, the City Council concludes that the plat serves the public use and interest it might seek to impose some conditions that could help the potential purchasers form a knowledgeable decision. One solution might be to include a set of covenants that require that all sales literature and the face of the plat include information that the post office operations may create loud noises during the course of a day and that such noise might interfere with sleep in units located on the subject site. That will avoid the situation of potential purchasers seeing the subject site and its homes during the day and not have any realization that the post office operations occur during the night and such operations might make sleep difficult or disturbed. Obviously, this still allows units that may be severely affected by the noise to be built as opposed to finding a better use for the site that would not be affected by nocturnal noise, such as another commercial use. 9. This office therefore, would again recommend that the City Council deny a residential plat on the subject site but that if it chooses to approve this proposed plat, that it adopt some strict disclosure requirements. As the Post Office Manager noted, he really is not going to be happy fielding questions and complaints about the operations from future residents that this applicant acknowledges but that innocent purchasers will not be as knowledgeable about. Site Plan 10. The Site Plan is denied as the property should not be platted as proposed and the site plan is therefore, inappropriate. This office will provide an alternative decision on the Site Plan in order to allow the proposal to proceed if the City Council decides to approve the proposed Preliminary Plat. IL In the event that the City Council determines that the Preliminary Plat should be approved, this office will review the proposed Site Plan. The site plan review will treat this analysis as if the plat were approved for 20 lots as proposed by the applicant. As noted above, if the plat and site plan are approved, there should be disclosures regarding the nature of the noise that might be generated on the adjacent post office site as well as the timing of those noises. In addition, clearly, buffering this site from those noises should be considered an important matter to assure some quality of residential living. 12. Residential uses are permitted in this general area by the Comprehensive Plan. Integration of single family uses then depends on mitigating the impacts of adjacent uses on the site so that it possesses residential amenities. The Comprehensive Plan suggests buffering incompatible uses from one another, particularly, if transitional uses cannot be used to separate the disparate uses. 13. The twenty proposed homes meet the Zoning Code's former R-5 Zoning District's density requirements. The applicant is proposing appropriate setbacks from streets and adjacent properties including the larger buffer required between this site and its southerly, R-10 neighbor. A requested deviation from the maximum front yard setback of 15 feet to one of 28-feet allows for pedestrian and vehicular access and appears reasonable with the proposed courtyard layout and streetscape. The lots each provide their allotment of landscaped open space. 14. The development of the subject site will create construction related impacts but those will disappear once the project is complete. There will be some additional traffic generated by the development but that should not create any substantial impacts on the transportation corridors. In addition, a traffic mitigation fee will help offset any impacts. As noted in the earlier plat discussion, there could be Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-1 31 ; PP_ SA-H. FCF January 25. 2005 Page 10 impacts on the operations of the adjacent post office in the way of complaints about noise_ In order to lessen some of the impacts, a sound barrier masonry wall should be erected along the north and west property lines of the subject site. Such wall should be designed by acoustical engineers to provide noise attenuation. In addition, landscaping should be installed to further assist in noise reduction and limiting the visual cues which play a part in noise perception. The two-story homes and grade difference will make it hard to limit noise penetration to the subject site. 15. The site plan appears to make reasonable use of the subject site. The buildings provide a reasonable amount of separation from one another. The buildings contain the necessary Demonstration District modulation and articulation as well as side or rear loading garages. 16. There are urban services such as sewer and water available to serve the 20 new homes. Mitigation fees, to offset impacts to parks, have been imposed. 17. In conclusion, this office recommends that the City Council deny the proposed plat and site plan as incompatible with the adjoining post office operation and an inappropriate use of property that even though zoned CS is not well -located to afford the residential amenities that should be guaranteed by traditional zoning demarcations and land use development criteria. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should deny the proposed plat_ DECISION: The Site Plan is denied as the property should not be platted as proposed and the site plan is therefore, inappropriate. Alternative Recommendation and Decision If the City Council approves the Preliminary Plat then the Site Plan should be approved subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. 2. The applicant shall execute restrictive covenants that require all sales literature and sales listings initially and subsequently to note the location of the post office and that the post office operations may create loud noises during the course of a night and very early morning hours six (6) days a week and that such noise might interfere with sleep in units located on the subject site. 3. Corresponding language about the post office noise shall be included on the face of the plat. 4. The applicant shall construct a sound barrier masonry wall along the north and west property lines of the subject site. Such wall should be designed by acoustical engineers to provide noise attenuation. In addition, landscaping shall be installed to further assist in noise reduction and is designed to limit the visual cues which play a part is noise perception. The applicant shall revise the plat to reflect the easement along the rear of lots 1 through 3 and 18 through 20 to be an alley right-of-way with a width of 16 feet with a minimum of 14 feet of pavement. Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-131, PP, SA -II, ECF January 25, 2005 Page l 1 The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. 6. The applicant shall be required to post the 26-foot private access easement (Anacortes Avenue NE) with "No Parking" signage on each side. Staff recommends the applicant shall comply with this requirement to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for landscaped right-of-way improvements, as well as for any shared private utilities/drainage facilities or private access and utility easements to include the private pedestrian access easement. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager. ORDERED THIS 25day of January 2005. !' FRED J. KAUF N HEARING EXA INER TRANSMITTED THIS 25'h day of January 2005 to the parties of record: Nancy Weil 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Juliana Fries 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Cliff Williams 5326 SW Manning Street Seattle, WA 98116 Kevin Chamberlin 18930 45"' Place NE Lake Forest Park, WA 98155 TRANSMITTED THIS 25'h day of January 2005 to the following: - Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Larry Warren, City Attorney _Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Bob Wenzl 636 Lake Sammamish Lane NE Bellevue, WA 98008 Stan Engler, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services King County Journal Ridgeview Court Preliminary Plat File Na.' LUA-04-131, PP, SA-11, ECF January 25, 2005 Page 12 Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section I OOGof the City's Code,_ request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., February 8, 2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written 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., February 8, 2005. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use.decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision --maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include bot' the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication pen -nits 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. 10 T23N R5E W 1/2 NE 4th St. CA CA -0 W CA CA CA NE7"' -- _ f R-10 R-1© R-10 R-8 SE 132n -SE 142nd St. Q) RUP) 0 (P) / G6 - 22 T23N R-5E W 1/2 SX O — — — — F—t.. C5t7 simile A ZONING ., .� P/R/PW 7ECllMCAL SERVICES F62:4B0o t � T7 im R r,N w 1 /7 SEOTION 16 . .1NSHIP 23 NORTH RANGE Q EAS1T/W.MI. IV I } / f Y ii 1 � z NE 4th ST z � Y 00a 4f .,u,a S l 6009 4 -- l W W a .2+0 ,:,a 518210 oa9 f I 0041 �i 2 Z aosto �' o`o 2 518210irn 0031 �' s O',6210.0010 �i 518210 (m Q ,I g a,e21o•o0,0 „ram A 'vf� 0020 ,(i� 1523 ,uwa o P .,.2,r�,. ap - ✓.(1 SITE 90^. ! :.� �7 t.340 `i V- '9C ,a2301 ryzj a Z 9t9z I rJ1AV 1 s+u,o W S w 152305 f 10 �! era . ate2to a,a2,o 0 N 9030 '—�`��t-- 0080 4� ' 0086 C (2,14 Ao.) 616210.O049 � CO NE 2nd p� "!!t +•.P I � `I,Zlulcs.,.•ps,n, p,u, m, f �--1—. ��7�07t2�'l�(j1007,�100a1��00a0� fl0� f 51 f NE 2rd ST-»»» 06°0 1 i E 25, t C Am.fl*&A s•.•.•Y. rYA«.e aw..rw RECaµrA ENOEC FOR ,1PPROVAj �n 0ln. rrtn0 .,YA ...«t .e M14 i...Ya •.,w. �orD or Ulon � .* M^• Y•.IW r l.Yl Y,•All .V. M14 212 U) 152306 W 9075 tUi Ak) l9nos 004048 wAv c T t'7 t-- 215 #152305.91 I,OA. A•) 9018 (3.75 Ao.) 52,305 9648 0010 .X NEIGHEI MAP, I AEC ,IC OWNS WDEVELOP ER; rgo(H(• GWrI LLC cWlAcl: iWl Yuwf •IaxD.`ra� r1011.1 Wi REGISTERED ENGINEER cK.n w w t(c+Oq, r LAND SURVEYOR .�U�c Ar tnew[[rwt ce,r«ADp <erl Kr. tot OdillMflu SCWDvo. ra hell r�M(. (.Ifl 111-1,JD LEGAL DESCRIPTIONDESCRIPTION rM r.clnt �«M.(tt nrL( fuat. woa I,o +.K sWM Ilw b Mt t,n �w b Mt �«Mt,sr of M( n«MKSr WMiM b rn( H«Mwtt( WAIi+M OS stem, ,l. �s)ur I) r«i . aArlD(f GSI, tra,I, , Rceq Ard uwMK •,N?s DM .0 uu`.Au« b uc«D, Ano n,lowt As . news Aac a —e¢wole rl wl; Oct" Mt ("I r f Icc, b s,'D n,cl BENCH MARK cOn Douw e. ' w GAft A' lnC or uc lt0 wn or uL �M ii fs.I. tt in tt) AwD I,DM AI( i.(. tn.r. cow fte n). LC non:.el.or ,NIfW dR b AWNGDutIIOL fM([tf. Oiut 1f01 VERTICAL DATUM .ADO HORIZONTAL DATUM MwclGt sl, t( rl Ar�C. M. INC +Ao uin �., Dtaroc sf.usf.li I a®��®®® =®qua®®mmnm o® ®mmlm® 1. D(e Q. IA.m.t n,A ., VIM ,« A.m•rla►n c.rin.«. urn.... twra... RECDNUENbrb EDR APPROVAL Enoln��nnt7 c '^ IAx,� Corpor�tlon __ 'e11 M r.ic�_ I rwor[ l.Ll rn•r,sr I„ full lu.nl, rAR,�� r.x BEOTION 16 TOWNSHIP 21 NORTH RANGE d EAST W.M. Ia(p AEC I mm i .,� „���, J rMaONT CLCVATfON� NOTC. ., wiN�iN 1'LOOR Ow ■� of r 'O e6 AT TRADE I *^ •RADIM► ,AN J. ROOwi TO WillTr12 n OR LOW\R •� Mp Mi6NAN1CA{, tOVII.'NII• pl{ TI+IR ►TRVy'Tyl\ee TO m ON TgI'ROO✓• ROOF COLOR TO OR Wow TO ►ADNM ♦RCT GOMwpiT.0m 0.14O66e S. wOVi[ COLOR. M TQ OR O"• NITO TRIM wTw OClii, iROT. ^LMDI,D, OR *ADO "ODT MCLAK L•LL'VAT10N „� N\ I\Ni1V.L NIA. .i/V.ir w • •.I •w aww. \.r�ww ON IM�\L! Mr\R\ \..VYM'• MO.Nw� �� IJIN. iMN\R \I epuAlca rooTAsee MAIN V�RR. IOL TOTAL OA ..I.00 4$p THIS M'LAN TO 00 ON LOTS 5,6,1 S b it, I 41 �R1�f ®®B®®®®e oil 77nn4� LL'rT i=L]=NATION «...N.R.� N.A. ...�... �.. �.. t'Clbf-fT CLCVATION .\\ I\WML wrn sanu� v.• . r.e• OZ: 9 S.LOi NO 09 OJ. N'di.l SIH.L rn M.rr. u. OCf �9�/11'I9 ' 3iLL. �vioi �. rer flflrrll .4sr M.nu .■. I CIO NIMH .�NOii*d/�.%'1.'Z 1N91211 •asa,.00r-avvnoa' ,.A. NO114rI�.'i q 'a{4r�y wmr'fiL wr _ -4- ^"1T1 l'� iLjLi e I iO0.1 fev4 YO 'ONew1. 'w.Ye 'tel.4 nines wI.IL ■LNM•rr0 YO 4Mwl-YO'1p7 f[flON 't 4f1eNIN4 NOLL40rwe9 w.Y1 NMOM.I Oi IN�11 l4 of Y01M wooy � roeY .ru No f4 of tfYruonris y.ruo YO iNfWr1AO1 1'.'91N`IN-J.w on 't YO Oi [roey 't -"in yaw f o N.'v eNlewe o.'Ye a... of yy wYW r0 Y00'1.1 n.l.r . •.aOn y.M.n y.p�. C.../u Y19 � .o�� • M •.T`.. .LLW M.n.. . ...IN.1.1�1 II4.I�IMI.IL1.` .11 _ _q 9 Ii ig� LJIJ - - I. U I-MONT HLL'VATION .0 ..wwi.b w.n. ..KM W . i•w• 6QVARQ rOOTA6Da �.� MAIN 600 � `� CT[. �• .�'��W ►IDOa O' NO�IY wOMf UI�CR 1C4 TO D. AT 0.1AD. r!R •14DINy .6A.N TOTAL 7. 1.00.f TO be 1.13 0 601'"m ., w0 M.6w.,w.6..1, .MI...III.T OR vARA66 470 oTw.1a sTw6Tvn.s *o s. ow Tw. wo6. 1. w00. fiOtAR TO Dr Vo— TO M.DNM �r 60M.O.TOw N1 NW... I .. •.OV.. 6060— V..Me on olv- W T. T1.IM .+�Tw e.l�., .+ar. �t.MowD. oR w. DOOT III 1 � i I I oaaoaoao 00000aao �e1=Are eLev.6,TION ......nw.b w.n. �.. Who V y THIS mLAN TO oo ON LOT IS RIbHT CLLVATION q;" eLM\/ATION March 29, 2005 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: Liberty Ridge LLC Attn: Mike Merlino 9125 10"' Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 CONTACT: David L. Halinen Halinen Law Offices, P.S. 10500 NE 8"' Street, Ste. 1900 Bellevue, WA 98004 Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA 04-162, PP, ECF LOCATION: 201, 251, & 257 Bremerton Avenue NE SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 64-lot subdivision of a multiple parcel, 9.6-acre, site intended for detached units. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on March 8, 2005. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the March 15, 2005 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, March 15, 2005, at 9:31 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No. 4: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Plan Llmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: I.( )A-04-162, PP, FUF March 21). 2005 Page 2 Exhibit No. 5: t Trading and Drainage Plan Exhibit No. 6: Existing Conditions N,xhibit No. 7: "boning Map Exhibit No. 8: ERC Mitigation Measures H:xhibit No. 9: Katie Walter, Professional Resume Exhibit No. 10: Sheet 1 of Preliminary Plat drawing set showing vacation of 15.5 foot right-of-way along Bremerton Avenue Exhibit No. 11: a Vacation Petition to City dated Exhibit No. 12: Letter from Ronnie Walton dated 12/27/2004 3/ 1 /2005 Exhibit No. 13: Renton City Council minutes dated F:xhibit No. 14: Noise Report by Mr- Jerry Lilly 2/28/2005 Exhibit No. 15: Deed to the Foster property Exhibit No. 16: Lot Line Adiustment H:xhibit No. 17: Access Easement Agreement dated Exhibit No. 18: 1.aWSult, Kitsap Case Law March 9, 2004 Exhibit No. 19: Lawsuit, Snohomish Case Law Exhibit No. 20_Second Grading Sheet The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The site is located in the east portion of the City of Renton just south of the NE 4°i corridor and to the west of Bremerton Avenue NF. The site is zoned Residential-10. On the site there is a Category 3 unregulated wetland located in the southwest portion of the site, which is proposed to be filled. '-I'here are two tracts proposed, Tract A in the southwest corner of the site for the storm drainage tacility and Tract B which continues along the entire southwest and western edge of the property which would be a Native Growth Protection area. Maplewood Creek runs along this area and continues northward. There would be a 25-foot enhanced buffer on each side of the creek. Due to any wetland that would be potentially located within 100 feet of the site, the applicant did an assessment of this wetland in the northwest corner of the site and that is unregulated Category 3 therefore, this proposal would not be affected with that wetland. A Development Agreement was made on this site, it was approved in August of 2004 with several stipulations. One, this site would be zoned R-10 as well as the Comprehensive Plan Use designation of Residential -Options (RO). There are also some site -specific restrictions that state that all residential buildings must be single-family, all lots abutting the south boundary line must be 50 feet in width (Lots 23 through 29), and lastly the net density cannot exceed 10 du!ac. The proposed density for this plat is 8.3 du/ac. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated for the project, which included fourteen mitigation measures. No appeals of the determination were filed. The purpose of the Residential Options designation is to create new, lower -density neighborhoods in a traditional development style while at the same time support intill development. This proposal is consistent with the Residential Options land use development and the environmental element. Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: WA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 3 A net density of the development would be 8.3 dwelling units per acre, which is within the allowed range. This proposal is all detached single-family units and complies with the density and unit mix requirements for R-10 zoning. All lots comply with the lot dimension requirements as well as meeting the required setbacks. The proposal's compliance with these building standards would be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. Several buildings and outbuildings currently exist on the site, the applicant must obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings prior to the recording of the final plat. The R-10 zone requires setback areas to be landscaped including the addition of trees and shrubs to be planted within the front yard area of all lots within the plat. The satisfaction of this condition is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division Project Manager. The side lot line of the proposed lots are at right angles to the street line. All lots would gain access to public roadways either directly, or via private driveway access easements. As proposed, lots comply with arrangement and access requirements of the Subdivision Regulations. Each of the lots satisfies the ►minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-10 zone. All lots located at the intersection of public rights -of -way would meet code, all would have a radius equal to or greater than 15 feet. Access is proposed via the Bremerton Avenue NE coming from the south through the Laurelhurst Plat. This proposed plat required two means of access, depending on the outcome of the Ridgeview Plat, north of the site along Bremerton Avenue NE, it is a requirement by code that a minimum of 20 feet width of pavement and a pedestrian walkway be required along Bremerton Avenue NE from the northern property line up to NE 4°i Street. If the right-of-way required to be dedicated by the Ridgeview Court Plat is not in place prior to the recording of the Elmhurst Plat, the applicant of this plat would be required to dedicate the public right-of-way along that parcel. There also is a requirement for a dedication of a minimum of 25 feet from the centerline of Bremerton Avenue NE for this subject plat. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement is suggested for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat. Traffic, Park and Fire Mitigations fees were imposed by the ERC. The subject site is located within the Renton School District boundaries and they have indicated that they can accommodate the approximately 28 new students. The storm drainage/surface water would be located in Tract A in the southwest corner of the property between Lots 22 and 23. In order to enhance the storm drainage tract it is to be fenced, landscaped and irrigated unless drought tolerant plants are used. The property lines of Tract A fronting Road A, Lot 22 and 23 should include a landscape visual barrier and fencing. The property lines along Lot 22 and 23 should include a six foot high solid wood fence or other approved material (no chain link), the portion to the southwest of Tract A required only the split rail fence. Staff recommends approval of the Elmhurst Preliminary Plat subject to five conditions. David lialinen, 10500 NE 8"' Street, Suite 1900, Bellevue, WA 98004 stated that he represents the owner/applicant liberty Ridge LLC. There were a couple of questions that arose during Ms. Fiala's testimony, E111i11111-st Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, FCF March 29, 2005 Page 4 in terms of the question of shared driveways, the applicant is planning to have individual driveways, the purchaser of -the project has requested that and that is the applicants intention to provide those driveways. Secondly, regarding the small segment of Tract A that abuts the south line of the property, they are willing to fence that in any way that the City staff would like to have it done. The applicant has reviewed the proposed conditions for approval and finds them acceptable. There was a question regarding the unregulated wetland in Tract A, Katie Walter, a wetland scientist, biologist and botanist is present today and can address that question. Katie Walter, Shannon and Wilson, 400 N 34"' Street, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98103 stated that she performed the wetland delineation both on this site and the site to the north back in 1998. The wetland to the north is just offsite north along the west property boundary. It is a small wetland, just over 2,000 square feet in size. It was designated a Category 3 wetland under the City's regulations and the question was with respect to its closeness to Maplewood Creek. 'That creek has been channelized in the past, the area was developed early in the 1950's, and at different periods of time the creek has been channelized and moved and it appears that long before now that wetland has become isolated from the creek. There is a dirt berm that exists between the creek and that wetland. The isolated wetland on site is slightly different in that it appears to have formed on fill as a result of a stormwater pipe that outlets near the east side of the wetland and it appears that that wetland is isolated, most of the water that gets to that wetland either infiltrates or evaporates and probably during very large storm events it may have some overland flow. The creek on site, which runs along the western property boundary has been heavily channelized, it's about four feet lower on the northern side than the site boundary depending on the amount of fill in different places on that site. On the southern portion it is six to eight feet lower than the actual site. On the northern two-thirds of that site it's been channelized along the property boundary, it's an ephemeral stream, it wasn't flowing, in fact it was completely dry in June of 2004, and in December of 2004 it wasn't flowing, but there were some puddles of water. It was flowing in 1998 when she was at the site. It does flow occasionally, but mostly during storm events in the area. The buffer along the creek is heavily vegetated with blackberries with almost no native vegetation. On the southern end there are a few more trees and some native vegetation. Mr. flalinen stated that for the record, the Bremerton Avenue right-of-way abutting the site, there were three small strips of land along the west edge of Bremerton Avenue designated as a 15.5 foot ROW to be vacated that is within proposed Lot 1. The second strip has a note that also shows 15.5 foot ROW to be vacated from Lot 46 north to Lot 42 up to proposed Road A, and finally the very south end of the site there is a note that says 7.5 foot existing ROW to be vacated, along the east edge of Lot 29. The applicant filed a petition with the City on December 27, 2004. This is a contiguous strip that Road A will cross and does not need to be vacated. This matter went before the City Council on February 28 and the Council voted to approve the requested street vacation with two conditions; area of vacation for the two northerly portions of the original request be set to a maximum vacation width of 12.5 feet and secondly, the petitioner shall provide satisfactory proof that outside utilities have received and are satisfied with any easements which are necessary to protect their facilities in the requested vacation area. Going forward with construction plans, the three-foot adjustment will be made within the lots and make everything fit. The reason that a Noise Analysis was done was in view of the Ridgeview Court project to the north, there was testimony by the manager of the abutting postal facility concerning truck and delivery noises that he wanted to make the City aware of. In that particular case, the Examiner indicated a recommendation for denial of that project, or in the alternative some special conditions of approval were suggested. That matter is now on appeal to the City Council by the applicant. While the Elmhurst site is further from the postal site than the Ridgeview Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 5 Court, it seemed prudent to have some field noise measurements taken over an extended period of time, 64 hours, so that some hard data would be available. That work was done by Jerry Lilly, who could not be here today, one of his colleagues, Michael Yantis is here today to provide an overview of the testing. Michael Yantis, Yantis Acoustical Design, 720 Olive Way, Suite 1400, Seattle, WA 98101 stated that he was here today on behalf of Jerry Lilly. He visited the project site on Sunday, March 6 with Mr. Lilly. The noise monitoring stations were set and they were able to review both the location of the stations and the equipment that was used. Two noise -monitoring locations were set up on site, one on the north boundary of Elmhurst property and a second approximately mid point on that north boundary line. Mr. Lilly took data for approximately 64 hours between March 6 and March 9 at these two locations. Position two took hourly data and position one was continuous recording of data every 2 seconds. Primary noise sources were traffic on NE 4"' Street, aircraft flyovers, and although the Post Office has been indicated as a noise source in the vicinity, the study indicated that it was not a primary noise source in the area. Mr. Yantis continued with an overview of the report. Noise codes do not specifically apply to public roadways and aircraft because these noises are exempt from the noise codes, developmental regulations help provide guidelines for jurisdictions and developers and how they might build their developments to make sure that the residents don't have noise levels that are excessive. Both Bellevue and Snohomish guidelines are based on the HUD guidelines that provide noise guidelines that are suitable for residential developments. Noise levels above 65 LDN are in the less acceptable category, noise levels under 65 are generally acceptable. The C:ty of Renton also has a noise ordinance that regulates noise levels between adjacent properties. The results of the measurements that Mr. Lilly recorded show that the Ldn (day -night average) varied from 56.3 at position 2 to a high of 57.8 at position 1. They are all very close in noise level. 1n addition to the long-term noise levels that were measured, Mr. Lilly paid particular attention to noise levels that might be occurring from the Post Office. While he was on site, there were two events that happened, that were truck events. One event happened at 4:45 pm when a truck left the facility and beeped its horn and the other event was the arrival of a semi -truck trailer rig that traveled onto the property, dropped its tailgate and unloaded material. Both of these events, although the noise levels are identifiable, they are a little bit higher than the typical activity happening on the site during that time. Using Figures from the report, he showed how Mr. Lilly was able to assess what might be an aircraft event versus some unknown event. In summary the noise levels that Mr. Lilly measured and reported in his report are suitable for residential use. There are within the HUD guidelines, maximum noise levels are primarily due to aircraft flyovers and they are consistent with other residential areas in the vicinity. Rose Woodall, 248 Union Ave NE, Renton, WA 98059 stated that her property abuts this proposed plat at the northwest corner out to Union Avenue. She has lived there 33 years and lots of changes have taken place. Her concern is that her back lot is like a park, if there is a split rail fence, it seems that children could just climb over. The City of Renton is going to build a park on the west side of Union Avenue directly across from her property, it seems that the children could cut across from this development, through her property and to the park. She would like to have a fence that kids are not going to be able to crawl over. She is concerned about her liability if the children jumped in the creek and wade across. The Examiner explained that the City does not usually require fencing between similar types of uses, in other words single family and single family. Perhaps you and the applicant can work something out, although a fence of some type is required to protect the stream buffer. Elmhurst Preliniinary Plat File No.: L.UA-04-162, I'll, ECP March 29, 2005 Page 0 Cliff Williams, 5326 SW Manning, Seattle, WA 98116 stated he was here representing the property owner of the development bordering to the northeast, known as Ridgeview Court. They are in support of this development. it represents a well planned and logical development and transition from the R-8 developments to the R-10 and then up into Ridgeview Court which has been zoned R-20. They have worked together in coordinating the site developments, the key things addressed are the road profile for Bremerton Avenue, the sewer service for Ridgeview Court, and also the grading between the property lines on the north side. They would like to complement the developer on the initiative to undertake this noise study. They find the study results very encouraging for all parties concerned. Thomas Foster, Langley Fourth Avenue Associates LLC, 5460 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite 106, Seattle, WA 98188 stated that they own the property to the northwest and adjacent to the Post Office. He submitted a letter to the City staff yesterday only to encourage the staff to look at the overall development of the area when you have Ridgeview Court to the east and Elmhurst to the south. They have a small piece of property to the south of the Post Office that potentially could be landlocked based on the new zoning of CA that happened in November. The southwest corner of the property is the end of the wetlands on the property and also the site of their storm detention pond. Some of the area has been cleared and they are currently under construction development permit with the City of Renton to complete the requirements for a Short Plat. He was encouraging the staff to look at the overall development potential of the site and area for pedestrian friendly access and also to provide for secondary fire access to not only their property but to the other properties as well. If Bremerton was ever to become blocked a secondary access from their property onto either one of these sites could add additional fire control possibilities and also would enhance pedestrian access to NE 4"' and would help the development of their property as well. Terrance FIB, President of Fernwood North Homeowner's Association, PO Box 3106, Renton, WA 98056 stated that he had a question regarding the grading of the site. Specifically the homeowners that abut the southern end of Elmhurst are concerned about grading that has been done to this site prior to the beginning of Elmhurst. When he and his wife moved here, this was zoned residential but there was a business operated here, McCann Trucking owned this land they were a trucking and excavating business. When the property was sold to Tydico and as soon as that happened they began to bring in large truckloads of earth and fill without applying for or receiving any permits. They raised the level of this land considerably, particularly in the area that abuts Fernwood North to the south of their land. Since this was not done with permits from the City of Renton, they wonder if this is going to be allowed to exist the way it is or if some effort is going to be made to return this level of the land to what it was before the illegal grading was done. They are concerned because it is quite a bit higher now than the lots in Fernwood North. The homes that will be built will be towering above them and provide an unsightly view to the north. The Examiner stated that they were talking about Lots 32, 33, 34, and 35 in Fernwood North and suggested that perhaps staff may have some comments about this issue. Kayren Ki,ttrick, Development Services stated that Elmhurst can be held to dedicate the rights -of -way off Bremerton when they don't own the property. A secondary access is required by Fire for this site. The preference is to the north, the owners of the property to the north have been in serious talks and trying to make sure that their designs met code. It has always been the intent that Ridgeview would go first, or a little ahead, or at the same time as Elmhurst. When Ridgeview was denied, it was necessary to make sure that that was secured, that is the secondary access, it is the way that they designed for their secondary access. Whether an easement would be sufficient if the timing did not work out, the answer is no, the dedication must be for sure, it is necessary to know that it is going to go through. Split rail fences are basically to allow for the movement of small animals that would go through that area. Planning would most likely have some concerns about blocking off that location entirely, but there could be Flmhurst Prehiuinarti Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 7 some discussions on something that might have small openings. Not quite sure how to solve that particular problem. Regarding Mr. Foster and his wish to have secondary access to the north is an issue that they agree on, but there is nothing that is in the code that would allow for this. The Transportation Division would be very interested in something through the Ridgeview Court, some type of connection through there. However, in that instance, the Post Office declined to participate. Ultimately this comes down to some type of agreement between private property owners in this case. Mr. Foster does have access up to NE 4"', primary access, but he does need a secondary access, just not sure what is going to be developed on his property. The site has been used out of standards both under King County and City of Renton when they took it over. There is no plan to do any grading or changing of the site height. All grading will be within the site, cut and fill, nothing new being brought in and nothing being taken out. Mr. Halinen stated that regarding Mr. Foster's comments and concerns about wanting a secondary access, Mr. Foster pointed out that the company he represents is a recent purchaser of the property that wraps behind the Post Office. The property was purchased September 2004. In 1999 a Lot Line Adjustment was done and included the Post Office property and the Langley Property (Mr. Foster). Regarding the secondary access, this is a problem of self -creation. An Access Easement Agreement was recorded March 9, 2004 proving that the Post Office did get title. The Lot Line Adjustment was set up to dead end at the back end of the property, they didn't need to do that, they could have had a loop easement along the east side of the postal property to provide for secondary access for emergency vehicles. It was set up deliberately, sold the property in its current condition to someone who would like to have one of the abutters bear the burden of a secondary access. This should have been considered and dealt with prior to selling off the properties. Elmhurst should not have to bear the burden of these issues, they should not have to give access through Elmhurst. Lou Larsen, Pacific Engineering and Design LLC, 4118 Lind Avenue, Renton, WA 98055 stated that there are four existing lots in Fernwood North, Lots 32, 33, 34 and 35 that abut against the area in question. The pad elevations are set such that they can get access from Bremerton Avenue, they are set to provide sewer connections to these lots, and to provide access for lot drainage into the detention pond. All this grading occurs on -site, within the Elmhurst property lines, they do not even come close to the south property line. If the lots were lowered, they would not drain into the detention pond. Lot 27 will be a little bit higher than what it is today, Lots 26, 25, 24, and 23 are being raised anywhere from three to five feet, depending on where you measure it. Those elevations are 25 feet into the property where this will occur. Some of that could be buffered out a little, but not very much. The Examiner stated that it doesn't sound like the City will address what may have happened prior to annexation_ Ms. Kittrick stated the City will not explore the site levels, it was like that when it came in for site approvals. They will not require the owner to return to what the property was like years ago. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 1 1:24 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION I laving reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 8 FINDINGS: The applicant, Liberty Ridge, LLC, represented by David L. 11alinen, filed a request for a 64-lot Preliminary Plat. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit 91. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 201, 251 and 257 Bremerton Avenue NE. Tile subject site is located on the west side of Bremerton approximately 600 feet south of NE 4th Street. 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single-family homes, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. 'The subject site is currently zoned R-10 (Residential Options including detached Single Family uses). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 5092 enacted in September 2004. 9. The subject site is approximately 9.6 acres or 418,176 square feet. The parcel is rectangular and is approximately 650 feet long along Bremerton (north to south) by approximately 640 feet deep. 10. The site has been used for construction offices and staging and older homes and outbuildings generally served office purposes. 11. The subject site slopes generally downward 3 to 5 percent from the north-northwest to the south- southwest where Maplewood Creek crosses the subject site. The site also has bands of steeper terrain that vary between 20 to 40 percent. Fill was placed on the subject site in the past and this material appears to have been placed without benefit of a permit. Neighbors report that it raised the elevation of the property adjacent to the creek 8 to 10 feet. 12. A Category 3 wetland is located in the northwest corner of the subject site and it is unregulated. Another wetland located offsite is also unregulated. As noted, Maplewood Creek crosses the southwest portion of the site. 13. The subject site is mainly cleared of vegetation but small stands or rows of trees are located near the south and west property lines, near the existing older structures in the northeast corner of the site and near the creek. Most of the trees with the exception of those in the protected creek corridor would be removed to allow development at the R-10 density permitted by the zoning. 14. The subject site is guverned by a separate development agreement. There are site -specific restrictions that include that all residential buildings be single family, lots abutting the south boundary of the site (abutting R-8 homes) be not less than 50 feet wide and that the density not exceed 10 units per acre. Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: UJA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 9 15. The applicant proposes dividing the subject site into 64 lots. The lots would be arranged around the perimeter of the site and in two interior blocks. Lot sizes will vary from 3,801 square feet to 5,979 square feet. The R-10 zone requires lots to be not less than 3,000 square feet, lot width to be 30 feet for interior lots and 40 feet for corner lots and lot depth to be 55 feet. Staff reported that lots would vary between 40 feet to 54 feet wide and from 95 feet to 112 feet deep. The lots along the south property line will comply with the 50-foot width required by the Development Agreement. 16. Two east to west roads wi II provide access to the interior of the subject site from Bremerton. These two roads will be connected to each other in a loop by a north to south road running through the western third of the site. A second north to south road will run between the east to west roads in the middle of the site creating the blockwise lot arrangement. Bremerton has an inconsistent alignment and width along the frontage of the subject site. The applicant is seeking a vacation and will rededicate property to create a more consistent alignment. 17. Bremerton does narrow north of the site adjacent to where the Ridgeview Plat was proposed. The City Council will be determining the status of that plat during an appeal procedure. Staff has noted that Bremerton does need to serve this proposed plat. 18. The density for the plat would be 8.25 dwelling units per acre after subtracting sensitive areas (creek corridor) and roadways. 19. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately 28 school age children. These students would be spread across the grades and would be assigned on a space available basis. 20. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 640 trips for the 64 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 64 additional peak hour trips, will be generated in the morning and evening. 21. The applicant has submitted a Noise Analysis Report for the project to determine if noise from the nearby but non -adjacent Post Office would be a factor for residential development of the subject site. The report was done since the Hearing Examiner recommended that the proposed Ridgeview Plat immediately north of the subject site but also directly abutting the Post Office be rejected due to incompatible noise generated by the adjacent Post Office. 22. The summary of the report contains the following language: "The ambient noise measurements conducted at the Elmhurst site's north edge demonstrate that the site is suitable for residential development... While there are routine loading and unloading activities and other activities at the post office that generate occasional environmental noise, this study has clearly shown that the intensity and duration of the noise generated by the post office is insufficient to significantly impact residential use of the Elmhurst site. (Footnote 2)_. Footnote 2: Anticipated future development of the Ridgeview Court site and the vacant parcel immediately to the north of the west half of the Elmhurst site will significantly screen the Elmhurst site from post office -generated noise, further reducing its intensity on the Elmhurst site." FlInhurst Preliminary Plat Nile No.: LUA-04-162, PP, FICF March 29, 200'-) Page 10 23. Stormwater will be collected in a pond in Tract, A which will serve as both a detention and water quality facility. The pond, which is located in the southwest corner of the site, will be adjacent to Maplewood Creek. Energy would be dissipated using a "bubble -up" system with the overflow running to the creek. It would meet the 1998 King County standards, Level 2 flow control. 24. Staff has recommended that the pond be screened and landscaped. The screen is to form a visual barrier but one that does not interfere with traffic. Staff recommended the materials to use and to avoid chain link fencing. 25. 'The subject site will be served by City water and sewer services. Utility line extensions to serve the site will be required and governed by code. 26. Staff has approved a street modification allowing narrower roadways. Since this narrows what would be parking strips or landscape areas, staff has recommended the addition of trees 27. The owner of the adjacent property north of the subject site was concerned about access to a portion of his property behind the post office. That property fronts along NE 4th Street and access is possible from there. It was noted that the current owner's predecessor in interest created the odd -shaped parcel by segregating off the post office site leaving the remainder. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed plat appears to serve the public use and interest. Due to a recommendation by this office that another residential development (Ridgeview Court) adjacent to the post office was inappropriate, the applicant was concerned that post office noise might create issues for developing the subject site. Those noises might be an issue but it appears that the distance between the subject site and the post office site should help attenuate the noise. The subject site can be distinguished from the Ridgeview court parcel by a number of factors. The subject site is zoned for residential purposes and is shielded by the adjacent Ridgeview Court property, which as a transitional property can be used for commercial purposes. In addition, open space that now lies between the subject site and post office could be developed with uses that further attenuate the noise. That is new structures could occupy the intervening open space and block post office noises. The greater distance and the potential for intervening buildings were not factors that could help the other property. The noise studies that were conducted were specifically conducted for the subject site and cannot be relied on for determining impacts on other properties and other properties cannot count on the development of intervening buildings that could eventually buffer this site from the post office. 2. The proposed plat appears to create reasonably rectangular lots. A fairly regular grid roadway and block system rather than a deadend cul-de-sac will also serve the 64-lot plat. The smaller lots of the R- 10 zone will still provide detached single-family housing choices to those who want less yard maintenance and smaller homes. The plat will offset its impacts on fire, parks and transportation services by paying mitigation fees. It will also contribute to the tax base of the City when developed with homes. The additional population and traffic will be fe'It in this currently sparsely developed area but those impacts were anticipated when the Zoning was adopted for the area. The applicant will be planting trees on the lots while also preserving the stream course and the current vegetation in buffers surrounding the creek. It appears that filling that occurred on the subject site can Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 1 1 remain and might have be permitted to allow appropriate sewer service. The applicant wili have to demonstrate that the materials are suitable for foundation support. The applicant will have to satisfy the City's needs for access to and along Bremerton to NE 4th Street. 6. In conclusion, the proposed plat should be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should approve the 64-lot Preliminary Plat subject to the following conditions: The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. The applicant shall have to demonstrate that the on -site fill materials are suitable for foundation support The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager. All lots within the plat shall be required to have a minimum of one new approved tree, with a minimum caliper of 1-1/2 inches (deciduous) or 6-8 feet in height (conifer), and shrubs (or equivalent) planted within the front yard. The applicant shall be required to set forth a restriction on the final flat stating this requirement. Each application for a single family building permit shall include a plan noting the location and type of plant materials within the front yard. All front yard landscaping shall be planted prior to final building permit inspection. The satisfaction of this condition is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division Project Manager. lie right-of-way for Bremerton Ave. NE along Parcel #518210-0042 (327 Bremerton Ave. NE) shall be dedicated prior to the recording of the Elmhurst Final Plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to recording of the final plat. 6. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements. A draft of the documents(s), if necessary, shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat. 7. Tract A shall be fenced, landscaped, and irrigated (unless drought tolerant plants are used). The property lines of Tract A fronting Road A, Lot 22 and 23 shall include a landscaped visual barrier so as to not interfere with sight distance triangles including plant materials which would provide a year-round dense screen within three (3) years from the time of planting. Also, the property lines along i.ots 22 and 23 shall be fenced with a six-foot high solid wood fence, or other approved material (no chain link). Tract A fronting Road A shall be fenced with either a wrought iron, or chain link with vinyl covering, or other decorative wood fence. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan and fence design identifying construction and plant materials for the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager prior to installation. Fences and landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: IMA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page 12 ORDERED THIS 29"' day of March 2005. FRED J. KAUf&AN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 29"' day of March 2005 to the parties of record: Susan Fiala 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Liberty Ridge LLC Attn: Mike Merlino 9125 10'1' Ave S Seattle, WA 98108 Lou Larsen Pacific Engineering and Design LLC 4118 Lind Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Terrance Flaig President of Fernwood North HOA PO Box 3106 Renton, WA 98056 Kayren Kittrick 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Rose Woodall 248 Union Ave NE Renton, WA 98059 Katie Walter David L. Halinen Shannon and Wilson Hal inen Law Offices, P.S. 400 N 34"' Street, Suite 100 10500 NE 8"' St., Ste. 1900 Seattle, WA 98103 Bellevue, WA 98004 C. Thomas Foster Michael Yantis Langley Fourth Ave Associates LLC Yantis Acoustical Design 5460 Southeenter Blvd, Suite 106 720 Olive Way, Suite 1400 Seattle, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98101 Cliff Williams 5326 SW Manning Seattle, WA 98116 TRANSMITTED THIS 29"' day of March 2005 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Larry Warren, City Attorney Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Stan Engler, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services King County Journal Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100(iof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing, on or before 5:00 p.m., April 12, 2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This Elmhurst Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-162, PP, ECF March 29, 2005 Page I') request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take fiirther action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 1 10, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., April 12, 2005. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processinjj 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. I I I I I I MwR IN'S ACRE ,TRACTS UNRECORDED � . •i J� t f.. "I � I 11�1� I t�l 1 1�i. 1 II I . e I �. (R7VATW I ,1 2 11 . i , III Z IIIIII \A A TRAC7T..B [I / ♦6 TRA ti 35 / I F'ERNWOOU' NORTH SEC. 15, TWP. 23 N., RNG. 5 E., W.M. 1 INARY PLAT OF RIOCE`AEW COURT TION PENOINI AT CITY Op RENTON) v�l I'I 4r4LA 33 I 32 �' I I TRACT I I 10 I-nuRELHURI'T PHASE 1 ? (UNDER Cr)lls RUCTION; I Y it R I I �I li 3 I A � 1 I I 1 i I TRACT N M alArYq� SCALE, f QO' VBMA , DATul/ an n Aarot Auw w tovmn •Iroevi . r 41G w. Dawn wwr � Aprna[71 IOfM •U`IOI w S' •Iw0 CCIWT SUYA([ MASS aSC AI rw[ SAa7 rPYC„pI y wf 11w SI•QT Awp I4M AK z YAA.prC MC worn..["" co•wa d scow Iti rows✓ xra, •Awx ac. r. a. MnUw a. ✓•w Ir.l' SOU mw v iw[ •CS/ QZWw V GR dIYA„Olr • 7.N 7Y[ {AWgt MC 1YNIrI.rpy rI11[ waSM SW[ CQ'H(W11Q [oIMr, Awq[ Y e.frV [pJw/PGOQ'WS[ rAf I f A •rY101 YANf w •1w1 aOrrlrf f1.MAK YAJJ aSt. Ar [r.rn wmr,t[„ar a wr .7w n Awo IAInI .K : wuwxrr nr[ weS„rGur ao•wa or a[enw 1[. rowsry r� worm �a � fA[r d 7NC S.IiAYRr[ wnIplAlt r1[ wam AYlA[.W OA7W Y 111J�S•[I (wAC t7/MJ MO �OMDwAtQ •Q[ rarp A I[ 1•Wg1rrl � iJlNy yl Af M1f Ib/?. M[ WW1R Y IOM SCA 74 1t,6 aY41[e11a r�ela er n.rnnus aeo SCAM Awo ?w rIC1M d I.Oaf00/lf7 w.0 NMt/[D A M pY0 [nnKM4 n7 /nR .WWI Mn1Itl MrAMOCi I' gl � .1 I H I I l,1 C 4J I I I II i II s � I w J ! 5 y r•o.ccr »o.� owa• � o•,.w .� .,00 MCR IICY., Tlp aif'f►wo i Lawo ri.aA�ro n-w o�o..r•o�_.00 Poi � CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NOWSIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT: LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LUA04-162, PP, ECF Elmhurst Preliminary Plat Liberty Ridge LLC, Mike Merlino 201, 251, & 257 Bremerton Avenue NE DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review and Preliminary Plat approval for a 64-lot subdivision of a multiple parcel, 9.6-acre site. Two tracts for open space and storm drainage are included. The site is zoned Residential - 10 du/ac and is to abide by a Development Agreement. The lots range in size from 3,801 sq. ft. to 5,870 sq. ft. and intended for detached units. All existing buildings would be demolished. Access is proposed via Bremerton Ave. NE to new internal public streets and private access easements. One non -regulated Category 3 wetland would be filled. Maplewood Creek crosses the southwestern portion of the plat. LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. A Geotechnical Engineer shall determine the suitability of the existing on -site fill prior to its use on -site. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services during construction. 2. At the time of building permits, additional geotechnical studies addressing the suitability of site soils for use as structural fill shall be prepared and submitted. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services. 3. The applicant shall comply with the "Geotechnical Engineering Study' prepared by Earth Consultants, Inc., dated August 30, 2004, regarding "Site Preparation and General Earthwork" and "Utility Support and Backfill.' The satisfaction of this requirement shall be reviewed and approved by Development Services during construction, utility work and building construction. 4. The project shall be required to be designed and comply with the Department of Ecology's (DOE) Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements, outlined in Volume II of the 2001 Stormwater Management Manual. 5. All contractors are to be made aware of the Potential presence of environmental contaminants and instructed to notify the property owner immediately if discolored, odiferous, or otherwise suspect soil is encountered during excavation activities. 6. If suspect soil is encountered during excavation activities, work in these areas is to be stopped until such time as a qualified environmental professional can assess the observed conditions and recommend corrective measures. If the presence of environmental contaminants is confirmed within the suspect soils at concentrations exceeding applicable MTCA cleanup levels, then (a) those soils are to be handled and managed in accordance with MTCA and; (b) the work will be managed and overseen by a qualified environmental professional and properly documented and reported to the Department of Ecology (DOE) in accordance with MICA. 8. The project shall comply with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual to meet both detention (Level 2 flow control) and water quality improvements. 9. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee based on a rate of $488.00 per new single-family lot. Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 10. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Traffic Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per each new average daily trip associated with the project. Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 6X' 11. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Parks Mitigation Fee based on $530.76 per new single-family lot_ Credit to be given for the existing three residences. The fee shall be paid prior to the recording of the final plat. 12. Evergreen and deciduous trees (i.e. Douglas fir, western hemlock, and big leaf maple) shall be plantek 15-foot centers within the 25-foot wide buffer along the east side of the stream. Two -gallon size tree stock shall be used. Planting should occur in the Fall to allow plants to develop roots over the Winter. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division. 13. During site preparation and construction of improvements and residences, the applicant shall install silt fencing with brightly colored construction flags to indicate the boundaries of the stream/creek buffer. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division and be completed prior to the issuance of construction/utility permits. 14. After the development of roadway and utility improvements, the applicant shall install permanent fencing (i.e. split -rail fence or other approved barrier) and signage along the entire edge of the stream/creek buffer. The satisfaction of this requirement shall be subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Division prior to the recording of the final plat. LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: - i'HE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: THE NORTH '/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST %4 OF THE NORTHWEST '/4 OF THE NORTHWEST '/ OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE NORTH %2 OF TRACT 5, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL B: THE SOUTH '/z OF THE SOUTHEAST '/4 OF HE NORTHWEST '/4 OF THE NORTHWEST '/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; EXCEPT THE EASTERLY 7.5 FEET FOR ROAD; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE SOUTHERLY '/-, OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF); ITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: THE NORTH '/z OF THE SOUTHEAST '/4 OF THE NORTHWEST '/4 OF THE NORTHWEST '/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M.; EXCEPT THE EAST 37.5 FEET THEREOF FOR ROAD; AND EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 FEET OF THE REMAINDER; (ALSO KNOWN AS THE NORTH '/2 OF TRACTS 5 AND 6, MARTINS ACRE TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF; EXCEPT THE SOUTH 110 FEET OF THE EAST 215 OF SAID TRACT 5); SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. Q: web/pw/devserv/forms/planning/masterapp.doc SEC. 15, TWP- 23 N., RNG. 5 E y W.M. J if � boaw MN.E: 4.TH " E 28T s 10 Ql AR< �•• O :SNa 2 1 � ,t - O I , ���tJfia� I "� I.is ACf2'M MARTIN'S ACRE TRACTI �� 3Tua ists.u, 'CORP O F.SSAC .. UrrflT S.P. 678160 s R 66 - 20fs ° 0 �i "---- - ✓ I (3)to ,a Vwe 6 it 77 q rr � AR 676076 .0, or en ' ZR I3 ♦ r sD , KQ°♦ \ I O rol V 30 �. �-� a NE. 2N0 gT. '� w as ," 1.50 Ac. S� — $P 17114 g 0.35 A� �Sy se�y sT 56 �y �a .: 152fF�T.50 u t 33 34 33 32 a 40 L►1 a $ u 6o c v, a s5 i w 45 iR` >< 36 ��V+ ) /�j�� M R V" ` G C0 tl a s, Al H L r, J, 31 ! 4.16 Ac. g M 4.32 Ac, 67 C 66 65 Z u >Z $ .i 43 62 , 3130 7[ N 41 N I4 N.E. °6 F �'IS n e y A b ' (YW Un ` as` �— ' _ s J �. ,u � � 3 � ��n° in�,z I3 1T x •'4 Y 22 �! 2Tr: � _ 6 AC. _ 2.30 Ac, 1 N+ t3 ♦ 2.64 ® _ zz IEu', 12 R 24246 • 1 Jt T. e _ n S IJAtiJ a D 2.30 Ac, ,o n E6 - 10 T23N R5E W 1/2 E 4th St. J ' i -NE- to -L_ - A� CA C R-10 R-10(P) - — R-8 - _-R-_g-XT � SE 132n a W RMH R 8 M E+ w RMH r---- ----- --- -- RC(P) 611 F(P) 1 _ G6 - 22 T23N R5E W 1/ ti� Y p ZONING >--to 6tY um:� TECHNICAL SEAV)CES 12/ZaV L?J28VO4 Ird C N SE 142nd St. N 0 r i Q 2ppOO 4 Q0 F6 1 lco0 15 T23N R5E W 1/2 5315 ,�. '7 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP/Strategic Planning Staff Contact...... Don Erickson (x-6581) Subject: Mosier II Annexation - V Zoning Public Hearing on Expanded Annexation Exhibits: Issue Paper BRB Closing Letter and Proceedings For Agenda of: October 10, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution........... . Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information........ . Recommended Action: Approvals: • Council concur in setting the second public Legal Dept......... hearing on zoning for October 24, 2005. Finance Dept...... Other... ... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: h", The Council accepted the 60% Direct Petition to annex on February 7, 2005, to annex approximately 31.24 acres and at that time, authorized the Administration to forward the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board. The Boundary Review Board held hearings on this annexation in July 2005, and adopted findings and a resolution expanding the original boundaries to 65-acres. Although Council previously held a public hearing on the original acreage, it has not yet considered zoning for the larger 65-acre area. Under state law, the City is required to hold two public hearings on future zoning, assuming it wishes to proceed with this annexation. The site is currently designated Residential Low Density (RLD) and Residential Single Family (RS) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map and would normally be zoned R-4 and R-8, consistent with these designations, if it is annexed. However, because the original 31.24-acre site was grandfathered in under the former R-5 zoning provisions, it would qualify for R-5 densities and the remaining non -street portions of the expanded site would qualify for R-8 zoning because of their RS land use designation. The Administration is recommending that Council adopt R-4 zoning for the RLD designated portions of the site and R-8 zoning for the RS designated portions of the 65-acre site. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council set October 24, 2005, for a public hearing to consider future zoning for the expanded Mosier II Annexation site if it decides to accept the expanded annexation. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh y CITY OF RENTON ti A. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, r' j1 AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 29, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President City Council Members VIA: �, JMayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator k'use STAFF CONTACT: Don Erickson, x6581 SUBJECT: Mosier II Annexation - 1" Public Hearing on Zoning for Expanded Area ISSUE: Now that the Boundary Review Board for King County has expanded the original 31.24-acre annexation site to 65.0 acres in response to the City having invoked its jurisdiction, does the Council wish to proceed with the annexation of this larger area? If the Council decides to proceed, does it wish to adopt R-4 zoning for the non -street portions of those areas of the enlarged annexation site that are designated Residential Low Density (RLD) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, and R-8 zoning for the non -street portions of those areas of the enlarged annexation site that are designated Residential Single Family (RS) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map? RECOMMENDATION: Council support R-4 (4 units per net acre) zoning for the non -street portions of the enlarged annexation site that are currently designated Residential Low Density (RLD) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, • Council support R-8 (8 units per net acre) zoning for the non -street portions of the enlarged annexation site that are currently designated Residential Single Family (RS) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, • Council accept the enlarged 65.0-acre Mosier II Annexation area as expanded by the Boundary Review Board for King County, and Mosier II Annexation - Expanded September 29, 2005 Page 2 • Council set a second public hearing date for November 28, 200, to further consider zoning for this pending annexation and its possible enactment. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The City received the 10 % Notice of Intent to Commence Annexation petition in June 2004, and held a public meeting with the applicants in August 2004. Council accepted the 10% petition and authorized the circulation of the 60% petition to annex at that time. In September 2004, the City received the 60% petition to annex for the original 31.24-acre site and it was certified by King County that same month. Council accepted the 60% Direct Petition on February 7, 2005, and authorized staff to transmit the Notice of Intent package to the Boundary Review Board for King County, pursuant to RCW 36.93.090. The Board held public hearings on July 18 and 19, 2005, and approved expanding the original 31.24-acre site to 65.0 acres by including the Puget Colony Homes subdivision to the west, an existing 13-lot subdivision to the north, approximately nine acres north of the Maplewood Elementary School, on the east. The expanded annexation site is within Renton's PAA in the East Renton Plateau portion of it. The area is designated Single Family Residential and Residential Low Density in the City's Comprehensive Plan and borders the former Carlo Annexation to the west. The Boundary Review Board, using its authority to expand annexation boundaries, did so to create better service areas, retain existing neighborhoods, and create more reasonable municipal boundaries. The annexation site is located within the Renton School District and is currently served by Fire District No. 25, under contract with the City. City reviewing staff raised no significant obstacles to annexation. Except for parks, no major service issues were identified. Parks indicated a general deficiency of improved recreational facilities in the area, and staff estimates a one-time acquisition/improvement cost to the City of $149,424. This figure, however, does not reflect the fact that the City is in negotiations with King County to acquire approximately 43.6-acres of unimproved County park lands south of SE 1361h Street and west of 149`h Avenue SE, just above and including Maplewood Park, for future city parks. The one-time prorated improvement cost for a future population of 508 residents is more likely to be $98,620. At full development, the proposed annexation is expected to have a slightly negative financial impact of approximately $6,260 annually (in today's dollars) because much of it is already developed. In terms of future zoning, if Council decides to annex the enlarged area, staff is recommending R-4 zoning for the original 31.24-acre site as well as the 8.75-acre piece north of Maplewood Elementary School added by the Boundary Review Board, both areas which currently have the Residential Low Density (RLD) Comp Plan land use designation. Staff is recommending that the Puget Colony Homes subdivision and the 13-lot subdivision just north of the original Mosier II annexation site, both of which currently have the Residential Single Family (RS) Comp Plan land use designation, be zoned R-8 (eight units per net acre). Because the original 31.24-acre annexation had been submitted in the first half of 2004, it and two other annexation sites with the RLD land use designation were grand -fathered in under the provisions of the earlier R-5 zone, since the City's new R-4 zone that replaced it did not take effect until November of 2004. Because Council is required to hold two public hearings on future zoning staff are requesting that a second public hearing be held at least 30-days H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\Mossier #2Ussue Paper for expanded area.doc Mosier II Annexation - Expanded September 29, 2005 Page 3 after the first, at which Council would be asked to accept these recommendations and adopt the respective annexation and zoning ordinances. CONCLUSION: The Boundary Review Board notified the City on August 12, 2005, that it had completed its resolution and hearing decision for this annexation. In its Resolution and Hearing Decision, the Board found that the original 31.24 acres were inconsistent with a number of Board's objectives, whereas the expanded area appeared to comply with or advance relevant criterion. The Board also noted that GMA policies and King County Countywide Planning Policies require logical and orderly growth and, in accord with these policies, RCW 36.93150 authorizes the Board to modify an annexation to do so. The Board found that the initially proposed boundaries were unreasonable and would have split up the existing neighborhood. It found that the expanded boundaries resulted in more logical service areas while maintaining the integrity of the existing neighborhood. It also noted that Renton was committed to guiding development and providing a wide array of municipal services to the area. The Board concluded that annexation would enable the City to provide a harmonious, efficient plan for governance of the built community, preservation of the natural environment, and protection of public welfare. Similarly, staff concludes that the proposed expanded annexation appears to further the City's business goals and be in the general welfare and interest of the City. Attachments H:\EDNSP\PAA\Annexations\Mossier #2\Issue Paper for expanded area.doc Proposed Mosier II Annexation gure 1: Vicinity Map �Y Economic n—, I t N i hb h d& St t PI This document b a yrcghic rep,eaentetlon. not guaranteed to survey oca -r , tended Ior ally asses ly and Eased on the besl ' formation owil of the date shown. This map is for display purpose= only. 0 1000 2000 1 1 : 12000 uC)I— e oprnen , etg or oo s ra egtc amm�g __Alex Pietsch, Administrator— Renton Clt�l �IrnitS G. Del Rosano ® Original Annexation Area 11 May 2005 C_1 Proposed Annexation Area Q) It• I -- -T T : - ^. L L ,.y {_ —� - - 1 l� L -- It, �- II i i •\\ \ - { fi f - I - --- �- o� n� i n 1I ^ I - �� -, - r4JL11 11 _ I, -� `, /� - _ ,,,,� M•^ ,,•°, 1 - N -.-. � "•- Yi - _-� to ry x t 13 a I aphie0r for cit oaea X, TTIa Document la a h'c eaentotion, not ar d r e"°' L based an the beat ty purpoe owilabla as of lheYOote shown. ryrr �: Thia mop Ie fw display Durpoaea only. Proposed Mosier II Annexation o 400 800 Figure 2: Topography Map ---- 'SY - 1 m Interval Countour 1 : 4800 ti �{ Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning — Renton City Limits ♦ i ♦ Alex Pietsch, Administrator a- G. Del Rosario ® Original Annexation Area I I May 2005 O Proposed Annexation Area / j I i ! -��[ �� -- .- , i - I i -- --- --1 J Elf -- p� Col \�� — �, th _J -us -; Q Q , 0 _ MIMI -- =I r at- i� ��i1 El13"d St e� 8 t P Q 0 O !�E ■ i■ W EDcn O —J 0 S1 p °a -t�l -1- L \ - I U) F� 1� i � o _--- Thia document Is yrophic repDnsenI"'-, not guoronteed occuracy, tended fw city purpoxs ly and bosednon the best infortnalion owilabla os of the dale shown. - -- Thia ap 1. for display purpoaee only. Proposed — Mosier II Annexation 0 800 -figure 3: Existing Structures Map _400 1 4800 Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Alex Pietsch, Administrator Existing structure : cture Renton City Limits Original Annexation Area G. Del Rosario �'LaNTo$ I I May 2005 O Proposed Annexation Area B 1� �-i I _ ; Q 0 `t- St - U) Z_ - - Proposed Mosier II Annexation Figure 4: Sensitive Areas Map E ; D I N' hho h ,d V, S PI UU-4% conomlc eve opment, etg roc s trategtc annmg uAlex Pietsch, Administrator> 40 /o Slope G. Del ftosano �► Wetland I I May Zoos --- Stream S \ SFi �JIhW Thia doament la o graphic rsprnentatian, not yuwanleed fo survey occurocY, landed for city Wrpoaof Doty and Eased on the r di ' ty pu pon o only. a os of tha data sho++�. Thia map i$ for disDloy purpwn only. _�_........_..,._.� U 400 800 1 : 4800 --- Renton City Limits t?Ij Original Annexation Area C---1 Proposed Annexation Area P i 4 }t .,x�c,■.,;:.. '�� a"_ 'e. '�k 7�.j� �+ },. -' ki pj•4jj?' 4.y yy�l :i N L_ . _i. A. L1A I I 4- 0 1 - L R This document lea hk representation. not aronteed ` t a y oa . �`Mded i« clt o°a i d Y n Co on the r di il.y p. p- o only. a an of the dote vhown. ,- -- -- — — Thle map ie for display purpaen only. Proposed Mosier II Annexation 0 400 800 Figure 3: Prezoning Map --- Renton City Limits 1 : 4800 F,conomic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Annexation Boundary Alex Pietsch, Administrator Del Rosario 0 Proposed R 4 G. �Pi Tod I I May 2005 Proposed R-8 MOSIER II - EXPANDED ANNEXATION FISCAL ANALYSIS SHEET Revieru�s Cass € ' ................... ................... Units Population AV Existing dev. 83 190 $18,828,000 Full dev. 221 508 $59,340,000 Assumptions: 2.3 persons / household $430,000 AV / new unit $226,843 Existing Average Existing Full Rate Regular le $59,120 $186,328 3.14 Excesslevy $1,669 $5,260 0.08865 State shared revenues Rate (per cap) Existing Full Liquor tax $3.52 $668.80 $1,788.16 Liquor Board profits $5.04 $957.60 $2,560.32 Fuel tax - roads $14.46 $2,747.40 $7,345.68 Fuel tax - arterials $6.47 $1,229.30 $3,286.76 MVET $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Camper excise $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Criminal justice $0.36 $68.40 $182.88 Total $5,671.50 $15,163.80 Miscellaneous revenues Rate Existing Full Real estate excise* $40.86 $7,763.40 $20,756.88 Utility tax** $133.20 $11,055.60 $29,437.20 Fines & forfeits* $18.33 $3,482.70 $9,311.64 Total $22,301.70 $59,505.72 * Per capita ** Per housing unit - based on $2,220 annual utility billing @ 6% tax rate Per capita Existing Full Contracted Services Alcohol $0.23 $43.13 $115.32 Public Defender $3.13 $595.46 $1,592.07 Jail $7.19 $1,366.48 $3,653.54 Subtotal $2,005.07 $5,360.92 Court/legal/admin. $57.08 $10,845.20 $28,996.64 Parks maintenance* $14.90 $2,831.00 $7,569.20 Police $270.00 $51,300.00 $137,160.00 Road maintenance** N/A $7,812.50 $19,256 Fire*** $1.25 $23,535.00 $74,175.00 Total $98,328.77 $272,517.76 Total revenues Existing $897:62<22 Full $256"5161 Total ongoing costs ... ........ . ... .................... Existing Full $27517f * See Sheet Parks FIA ** See Sheet Roads FIA *** Rate per $1,000 of assessed valuation (FD#25 contract) Net fiscal impact Existing $95G655 FuII ►$626fl<15 b."= I" i-ij SE' Parks acquisition & development (from Sheet Parks FIA): $149,849.14 Other one-time costs: Total one-time costs: 149,423.64* * Actual cost would be less if City takes over adjacent undeveloped County park lands Revised 8-29 per Finance Memo Cityof Renton `' Merritt II (Phase II) Current Annexations 52.7 ac. URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY CR'Y LIMITS � •^•• t � - - ^;;� ' • "_" "4' -� :. I AMV E ANNEXATION _ , Econamk Development, Nelghbol =ds 3 Strategic Plennhg G4DN Roae�Adni+rebr `w y y t t i - - t .�" 95ep.mpx lWe Approved by the B.F.B. Qj u e r i n � l $a �, 7.2 ac. w r , Hoquiam 20.4 ac. `.'� Park Terrace - Maplewood o I 79.7 ac. �.� rr,, Y Elementary i J , 9.8 ac. Lindberg 10.6 ac.KLKAMIJEN �. "I¢T, t 7 ` i Mosier � Leitch ` 16.2 ac. . y Maplewood ►`-s' Addition _ TUKWI �` x ,. 60.5 ac. r .' z I r - --- Akers Farms 13.9 ac. 4!!)IiCIRI. Falk r 6.8 ac. Q KENT i I s ! �HIOmlAKh 25.7 a• • ii •- LAKE YORN(is Washington State r4 .Review, Bosse` For KinoZ County )"t-4cr Yttilrtit���, Room 402, 400 YeSter V%-Iinh Seattle, [NA 98104 11hour. (206) 296-6300 • Fax: 196-6803 Jrr`tlr,/�r �r��r.rnetrokc.,��nz>/rrrnr�.����tioil August 12, 2005 N a s3 City of Renton Attn: Don Erickson, AICP Senior Planner 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98058 ,� `7 RE: CLOSING LETTER FOR RESOLUTION AND HEARING DECISION File No. 2195 - City of Renton - Mosier H Annexation Dear Mr. Erickson: We are writing to advise you that the Washington State Boundary Review Board for King County has now completed the Resolution and Hearing Decision, as specified in RCW 36.93, to approve the above referenced proposed action filed with the Board effective: August 12, 2005. The Resolution and Hearing Decision for this action is enclosed for filing as prescribed by RCW 36.93.160(4). An appeal period to Superior Court has been established, as mandated by RCW 36.93.160. The appeal period to Superior Court will close on September 11, 2005. In order to finalize the proposed action, the applicant must address the following requirements, where applicable: 1. Compliance with the statutory requirements and procedures specified in the Notice of Intention; 2. Sewer and Water district actions and some other actions are also subject to approval by the Metropolitan King County Council. If the Council makes changes to the proposal, the Board may then be required to hold a public hearing. 3. Filing with King County of franchise application(s), as required, accompanied by a copy of this letter. 4. Filing with King County of permit application(s), as required, accompanied by a copy of this letter. Page two continued, August 12, 2005 Form HE8 5. Notification to King County Office of Regional Policy and Planning, in writing, of your intended effective date of this action. This notification should be provided as early as possible. Please send this information to Michael Thomas, Office of Management and Budget, 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, Washington 98104, and 6. Filing with King County Council of: (1) one certified copy of your final resolution or ordinance accomplishing this action; and (2) a copy of this letter. This document should be filed with the Clerk of the Council (Attn: Ms Anne Noris), King County Courthouse, Room 1025, Seattle, Washington 98104 If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact our office at 266.206.6800. Sincerely, xtt� 4�� Lenora Blauman Executive Secretary Attachment: Resolution and Hearing Decision Cc: Metropolitan King County Counciimember Dwight Pelz Metropolitan King County Councilmember Reagan Dunn Ms. Anne Noris, Clerk of Council Ms. Debra Clark, King County Department of Assessments Ms. Lydia Reynolds -Jones, Manager, Project Support Services Mr. Bill Huennekens, Records and Elections Division Mr. Paul Reitenbach, Department of Development & Environmental Services Mr. Micheal Thomas, Office of Management and Budget King County E-911 Program District(s): King County Fire Protection District No. 25 King County Water District No. 90 Renton School District No. 403 Issaquah School District No. 411 PROCEEDINGS OF THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY RESOLUTION AND HEARING DECISION IN RE: CITY OF RENTON FILE NO.: 2195 . Mosier II Area Proposed Annexation King County, Washington 1. PUBLIC HEARING OVERVIEW In April of 2005 the City of Renton submitted to the Washington State Boundary Review Board a Notice of Intention (File No. 2195) to annex a certain 31 acre portion of territory based upon an annexation petition by property owners, pursuant to RCW 35A.14. The Renton City Council adopted the petition for annexation in February of 2005. The Notice of Intention describes the proposal as follows: • The southern boundary of the site is generally formed by SE 2n4 Place/SE 136th Street. ■ The northern boundary of the site Is generally formed by NE 2nd Court (if extended.) • The eastern boundary is formed by 144th Avenue SE/Jericho Avenue NE The western boundary is form by 142nd Avenue SE. On May 11, 2005, the City of Renton submitted a request for review, thereby invoking the Board's jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 36.93.100. In its request for review, the City sought modification of the annexation to add approximately 34 acres. The proposed Mosier II Area (Expanded) would then total 65 acres. The request for review was based upon the following: ■ The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and the King County Comprehensive Plan intend the annexation of the entire Mosier II Area. • An action to consolidate the entire Mosier 11 Area under a single jurisdiction at this time would enable uniform local governance and coordinated services. ■ Renton has pending new legislation that will provide for the Mosier 11 Area appropriate levels of development, services, and environmental protection for the natural community. ■ Renton is capable of immediately providing accessible local government and a full array of services to the entire Potential Annexation Area. A public hearing was conducted on July 18, 2005 before a quorum of the Boundary Review Board in order to consider the original proposal by the City of Renton to incorporate the Mosier II Area Annexation (31 acres). At the conclusion of that hearing, the Boundary Review Board voted unanimously to continue the public hearing to July 19, 2005 to consider Renton's request to modify the original proposal. The Board determined that there is evidence in the record sufficient to support the conclusion that the original proposal as submitted is inconsistent with one or more of the statutory objectives its decisions must advance (e.g., 36.93 RCW, 36.70A RCW). The proposed boundaries of the Mosier It Area (Expanded) are described as follows: • The northern boundary of the site is variously located north of NE 3`d Street (if extended) and along NE 2nd Court (f extended). • The southern boundary of the site is generally formed by SE 2nd Place/SE 13e Street. • The western boundary is variously formed by 140th Avenue SE and by 142nd Avenue SE. • The eastern boundary is variously formed by 144th Avenue SE/Jericho Avenue NE and by Lyons Avenue. Legal notice having been duty given, a modification hearing was held on July 19, 2005 before a quorum of the Boundary Review Board. The Board is responsible, under State of Washington law, to: (1) examine the record (e.g., application materials; technical studies; fiscal studies; regulatory analyses; other documents, exhibits, statements and testimony); (2) determine the spec policies and guidelines are applicable to the proposed action; (3) review and balance these elements; and (4) take the action that best advances those elements. As prescribed by the state law, the Board reviewed File No. 2195 in accord with RCW 36.93. (Local Governments — Boundaries — Review Boards). The Board directed particular attention to RCW 36.93.170 (Factors) and RCW 36.93.180 (Objectives). The Board also considered RCW 36.93.150, the statutory authority for modification of annexation proposals. In accord with the law, the Board also considered RCW 36.70A, the Growth Management Act, the King County Comprehensive Plan, the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan, together with other applicable state, regional, and local regulations and guidelines. The Boundary Review Board considered three aftemative plans for annexation as follows: • The City of Renton's initial Notice of Intention for the Mosier II Area Annexation (31 acres). ■ The City of Renton's proposed modification of the Mosier II Area Annexation — identified as the Mosier II Area (Expanded) — at 64 acres. • A King County proposal to further modify the Mosier II Area to incorporate the Mosier II Area (Expanded) and a new Mosier tl Area (Expanded'B"). The Mosier II Area (Expanded "B") would include the adjacent Maplewood Elementary School and additional residential properties. The proposed additional residential properties are described as follows- - The northern boundary of the proposed greater annexation area would be variously formed by SE 135th Street and SE 2"d Place/SE 136th Street - The southern boundary of the proposed greater annexation area would be generally formed by SE 138th Street - The western boundary of the proposed greater annexation area would be variously formed by 13e Avenue SE and 138 h Avenue SE. - The eastern boundary of the proposed greater annexation area would be formed by 144' Avenue SE. On the basis of the testimony, evidence and exhibits presented at said hearing, and the matters on record in said File No. 2195, it is the decision of the Board that the action proposed in said Notice of Intention be, and the same is, hereby approved with modifications to include the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) Annexation at approximately 65 acres. The legal description of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) Annexation, as approved with modifications, is attached hereto and marked as 'Exhibit I", together with a map showing the boundaries of the area herein marked as "Exhibit II." II. FINDINGS The Boundary Review Board finds that Chapters 36.93 RCW, RCW 36.70A, RCW 35A.14, King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Policies, the Renton Comprehensive Plan and its enabling regulations (e.g., zoning code) are applicable to consideration of: ■ The City of Renton initial Notice of Intention for the Mosier 11 Area Annexation (31 acres); ■ The City of Renton proposal for the Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation (65 acres); • The King County proposal for the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded "BI Annexation. The Boundary Review Board finds that the record for File No. 2195 provides sufficient documentation (e.g., technical data, fiscal data), evidence of community information programs, and certification of 2 petitions and/or legislative action to permit review of the initial Mosier II Area Annexation and review of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation, as prescribed by the State and local authorities that are intended to ensure logical, timely growth of municipalities. The Boundary Review Board finds that the record for Fife No. 2195 is insufficient for a proper review of the Mosier II Area (Expanded "B") Annexation. The record for File No. 2195 lacks sufficient information (e.g., legal analyses, technical analyses, fiscal studies) to support a review by the Boundary Review Board of the proposed incorporation as required by the State and local authorities. Further, there has not been legally sufficient notice to the community of the proposed annexation (Mosier II Area — Expanded *13� to allow the Board to consider the "last minute" modification requested by King County. Note: Pursuant to 36.93 RCW, the Boundary Review Board is required to complete review and dedsion-making for File No. 2195 by no later than September 10, 2005 The City of Renton cannot provide the necessary documents nor conduct the necessary commun►iy information programs for the Mosier l/ Area (Expanded `B' prior to September 10, 2005. The Boundary Review Board therefore finds that the review of File 2195 shall be limited to the proposals for the Mosier 11 Area Annexation and Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) Annexation as prescribed by the State and local authorities that are intended to ensure logical, timely growth of municipalities for the provision of local governance and adequate public services to local communities. RCW 3613.170 FACTORS AFFECTING THIS PROPOSAL The Boundary Review Board finds the following Factors (RCW 36.93.170) to be applicable to the City of Renton's initially proposed Mosier II Annexation (31 acres) and to the Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation (65 acres). Additional authorities applicable to the Mosier II/Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) include, but are not limited to: RCW 36.70A, RCW 35A.14, Fling County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Policies, the Renton Comprehensive Plan and its enabling regulations (e.g., zoning code). These State and local authorities are Intended to ensure reasonable development regulations and adequate public services to local communities A brief review of key Issues related to each applicable element is presented below: RCW 36.93.170 (1) POPULATION AND TERRITORY The Board considered the following factors to be applicable: Population Density; Proximity to Other Populated Areas; Land Area/Land Uses; Comprehensive Land Use Plans; Topography, Natural Boundaries and Drainage Basins; Likelihood of Significant Growth in the Area During the Next Ten Years; and Population Density/Proximity to Other Populated Areas/Land Area/Land Uses. Following is a brief review of key issues related to these factors. The entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) lies within the Urban Growth Area delineated by King County. The community Is unified with respect to its specific physical elements (e.g., geographic features) and social elements. The King County Comprehensive Plan provides for transfer of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) to a local jurisdiction. County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Policies call for contiguous orderly growth of local jurisdictions (e.g., U-304, U-208, U-301, U-304.). Policies also establish cities as the appropriate providers of local governance and urban services (e.g., FW--13, CO-1, CO-3; LU-31 - LU- 34, LU-36). King County Policy LU-31 requires cities to designate potential annexation areas to include adjacent urban lands and to eliminate unincorporated islands between cities. Policy LU-32 calls upon cities to incorporate lands within annexation areas into city boundaries. Further, the Mosier II Area (Expanded) is included in the "Annexation Element" of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and is located within the Renton Potential Annexation Area. The proposed action is based upon Renton Comprehensive Plan policies addressing annexation, including those provisions which call for inclusion of urban areas within the City for local governance and pertaining to encouraging annexations in areas where urban infrastructure and services are available for development at urban densities and in areas contiguous to City boundaries (e.g., Land Use Policies LU-11; LU-36; LU-37; LU-41 and LU-42). The evidence shows that the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) will likely experience continuing urban growth over the next ten years. Mosier II currently hosts substantial residential development. However, there is considerable land that is suitable and permitted for redevelopment or new development with residential uses. The City of Renton has planned for growth at urban levels of density in the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded). City plans establish standards to guide ongoing uses in this Area following annexation. Future residential development would reportedly be generally similar to and compatible with existing housing In terms of zoning, levels of density (equal to or less than currently permitted density), and design requirements. The Mosier It Area (Expanded) includes environmentally sensitive lands (e.g., Maplewood Creek, vegetated area, limited sloped terrain). Upon annexation, the City of Renton plans to manage these lands under regulatory controls designed to protect environmentally sensitive areas. These regulatory controls include (but are not limited to) storm water management programs and maintenance of open space/vegetated areas. With annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded), there would be an opportunity to immediately provide consistent and coordinated development plans, environmental protection standards, and public services throughout the entire Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) community. RCW 36.93.170 (2) MuNimPAL S mnces RCW 36.93.170 (2) directs the Board to evaluate factors related to Municipal Services. The Board considered the following factors to be applicable: need for municipal services; effects of ordinances, governmental codes, regulations and resolutions on existing uses; present cost and adequacy of governmental services and controls in area; probable future need for such services; costs; effect on the finance, debt structure and contractual obligations; and prospects of government services from other sources, and rights of other affected governmental units. Following is a brief review of key issues related to these factors. The evidence demonstrates that the Mosier li Area and Mosier It Area (Expanded) require municipal services and facilities. Service policies are established by the State Growth Management Act and the King County Comprehensive Plan. For example, King County FW 13 states that cities are the appropriate provider of local urban services to Urban Areas. FW 29 and FW 30 address the need for jurisdictions to plan for and coordinate services. Additionally, annexation is appropriate under Countywide Policy CO-1, when a jurisdiction has 'identified and planned for (a) full range of urban services". Pursuant to the State Growth Management Act and the King County Plan, the City of Renton has developed policies — through the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan, Comprehensive Service Plans, and other regulatory authorities — for serving all properties within its corporate boundaries. Upon annexation, the City of Renton would include the newly incorporated area in the municipality's Service Area. Then, as is its custom, the City can provide — either directly or by contract — a full array of specific service plans and programs for public services including: water service, surface water management, sewer service, fire service, police service, emergency medical services, utilities, road maintenance, law and justice services, human services, libraries, and parks and recreation services. The School District would continue to administer school assignments and is unaffected by the proposed annexation. The City of Renton has conducted fiscal studies related to the proposed Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) Annexation. At present development, City expenditures are estimated at $99,612 and revenues are estimated at $90,365. At full development, City expenditures are estimated at $282,968 and revenues are estimated at $270,175. Costs are related to state revenues, local property assessments, and city costs. These costs are generally based upon an averaged estimate of per capita use (e.g., police, parks, sewers). Following annexation, property owners will no longer pay County taxes for services and would, then, assume their share of the City's regular and special levy rates for capital facilities and public services. Studies demonstrate that the City would be able to sustain levels of service to the entire community at reasonable customer rates. Future capital needs and costs will be examined and funded through Renton's Capital Investment Program. Ci King County supports annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded). This consolidated action provides for a more logical municipal service area. The City can provide more cohesive policies, standards, programs, cohesive operations, and efficient, economic control of services than would occur with the more limited Mosier 11 Area Annexation (31 acres). Approval of the original proposal without modification would result in inconsistent and inefficient services as various County providers and local providers will be required to serve areas that are not clearly delineated. Service availability may be fragmented as well. Thus, services will be less effective, less efficient, and more costly to both government and citizens if the Board approves the original annexation without modification.. RCW 36.93.170 (3) E"E"s of ftoposAL RCW 36.93.170(3) directs the Board to evaluate issues related to effects of a proposed action. For File No. 2195, the Board considered the following factors to be applicable: mutual economic and social interests, and local government structure. Below is a brief review of key issues. The record for File No. 2195 supports incorporation of the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded). The Mosier II Area (Expanded) is contiguous to — and shares mutual social and economic profiles with — the City of Renton. Renton officials testified that the City is prepared to govern and to provide full services to this community. Annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) would promote a viable community because new citizens would be able to participate in local governance — including land use planning, service planning, fiscal planning and planning for public amenities to serve the community. Coordinated integration of citizens of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) into Renton would preserve social organization, support economic health, and protect public safety and welfare. King County supports the Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation as the action that is in the best interests of all parties. State law, the King County Comprehensive Plan, and the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan each encourage local governance of communities. Annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) is also consistent with the King County Annexation Initiative, which calls for annexation of urban lands to local jurisdictions at the earliest feasible date. Immediate annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) better promotes balanced governance than incremental incorporation proposed in the initial Mosier If Annexation. incorporation of the Mosier If Area (Expanded) into the City of Renton promotes strong and unified local government. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT State law provides in RCW 36,93.157 that Boundary Review Board decisions must be consistent with three sections of the Growth Management Act: ■ RCW 36.70A.020 Planning Goals • RCW 36.70A 110 Urban Growth Areas ■ RCW 36.70A210 Countywide Planning Policies With respect to Fite No. 2195, the key Growth Management issues involve the Countywide Planning Policies pertaining to land use and municipal services (RCW 36.70A.020 and RCW 36.70A.110). The Growth Management Act policies that guide the provision of public services and that are relevant to the proposed Annexation include: • RCW 36.70A.020 (1) Urban Growth: Encourages development in urban areas where adequate public facilities and services exist or can be provided efficiently. ■ RCW 36.70A.020 (2) Reduce Sprawl: Reduce inappropriate conversion of undeveloped land into sprawling low -density development. • RCW 36.70A.020 (10) Environment: Protect and enhance the environment and quality of life. ■ RCW 36.70A.020 (11) Citizen Participation and coordination in the planning process and ensure coordination between communitiesfjurisdictions to reconcile conflicts. • RCW 36.70A.020 (12) Public Facilities and services: Ensures that adequate public services and facilities are available to serve land developments., • RCW 36.70A 110 (1/6) calls for each county to designate an urban growth area. ■ RCW 36.70A 110 (3) directs urban growth to areas with existing or available public services and facilities. • RCW 36.70A 110 (4) states that '(in) general, cities are the units of local government most appropriate to provide urban ...services.' ■ RCW 36.70A210 (1) calls for cities to be primary providers of governmental services in urban growth areas. Incorporation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) into the City of Renton would effectively address Growth Management Act criteria for incorporation of urban areas. RCW 36.93.180 OBJECTIVES The Boundary Review Board has considered RCW 36.93.180 (Objectives), as follows: RCW 36.93.180 (1) PRESERVATION OF NATURAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES The evidence shows that the Mosier II Area (Expanded) is considered to be a neighborhood as that term is defined by case law, as "either geographically distinct areas or socially... distinct groups of residents". The Mosier 11 Area (Expanded), in its entirety, exhibits many features that support its link with the City. Both the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) and the adjacent City lands are residential in character. Demographic profiles are similar. Residents of the City and the Mosier II Area (Expanded) use common community facilities — schools, roadways, libraries, shopping centers, parks, and recreation facilities. The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan anticipates annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded). The City has already included the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) in community planning programs in order to guide its growth and to provide coordinated services. Annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) is consistent with the objective of preserving the natural neighborhood because this action would provide stronger links within the greater community and would encourage a more effective connection to the City of Renton. Renton officials testified that the Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation would provide all property ownerstresidents a voice and a vote in planning for the future preservation and development of their community. Community representatives demonstrate plans to effectively govern and serve this area as a part of a unified community. King County representative Michael Thomas stated that the County, supports the annexation of the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) because this incorporation would be consistent with state, regional and local guidelines. Further, annexation at this time will benefit the citizens by providing uniform governance of the Area. RCW 36.93.180 (2) USE OF PHYSICAL BOUNDARIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMBED TO BODIES OF WATER, HIGHWAYS, AND LAND CONTOURS The evidence shows that the Mosier II Area (Expanded) as territory that, based upon its physical boundaries, is appropriate for a consolidated annexation to Renton. City representatives stated that the proposed Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation addresses reasonable physical boundaries (e.g., co -terminus borders, rights -of way), and individual property lines. "Social neighborhoods" may also be the basis for boundaries. The evidence shows that the City and the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) share a social affiliation and form a single social neighborhood. Annexation of the entire Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) furthers the planning goals which support incorporation of the greater unincorporated area in King County. This comprehensive annexation will create a unified community with established physical and social boundaries. Approval of the original annexation without modification would create confusion with respect to community identification. RCW 36.93.180 (3) CREATION AND PRESERVATION OF LOGICAL SERVICE AREAS Annexation of Mosier II Area (Expanded) into the City of Renton will advance the creation and preservation of logical service areas. The King County Comprehensive Plan and Renton's Comprehensive Plan identify the City as the provider of services for the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded). More specifically, Renton has authority and responsibility to provide public services to all of its citizens under city plans and regulations including the Comprehensive Sewer and Water Plans, Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Storm Water Management Plan). 0 Renton representatives testified that the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) creates and preserves logical service areas by including a greater number of properties in the City's service area. Unification will enable design and implementation of efficient, consistent, consolidated service programs throughout the Mosier II Area (Expanded). These services (e.g., upgrades to rights -of -way; provision of storm water and surface water management systems) will also help to protect the built environment. King County officials state that incorporation of the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) to the City of Renton will provide citizens with more effective, efficient governance. A single, unified annexation would permit coordinated development plans, unified service areas and service systems, and environmental protection standards. A more limited, incremental annexation plan will further complicate an already complex service system. The County supports annexation of small isolated urban areas, such as the Mosier II Area (Expanded), as King County does not have the resources to efficiently manage and serve unincorporated islands. RCW 36.93.180 (4) PREVENTION OF ABNORMALLY IRREGULAR BOUNDARIES Annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) would provide a reasonable and regular boundary consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan Annexation Element/Potential Annexation Area Map. Annexation of the entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) is desirable to achieve the boundaries necessary to facilitate coordinated land uses and offer a more effective, efficient solution to provision of services. The original Mosier II Area Annexation would create a more discontinuous than regular boundary. This boundary would not promote effective governance. RCW 36.93.180 (5) DISCOURAGEMENT OF MULTIPLE INCORPORATIONS RCW 36.93.180 (5) is not applicable to File No. 2195. RCW 36.93.180 (6) DISSOLUTION OF INACTIVE SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS RCW 36.93.180 (6) is not applicable to File No. 2195. RCW 36.93.180 (7) ADJUSTMENT OF IMPRACTICAL BOUNDARIES Annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) would create more practical boundaries with respect to preservation of the community, governance, and planning activities (e.g., establishment of uniforrn land uses and development standards.) The Board finds that the initially proposed limited Mosier It Annexation area does not create a practical boundary. Rather, annexation of this limited area fragments community borders. Fragmented boundaries result in splintering of community identity. Efficient provision of public facilities and public services is hindered by discontinuous boundaries. Annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) will enable coordinated governance. Annexation would place the natural environment and built environment under City jurisdiction, thus creating more practical boundaries for governance and for the provision of public facilities and services. RCW 36.93.180 (8) INCORPORATION AS CITIES OR ANNM-nON TO CITIES OF UNINCORPORATED AREAS WHICH ARE URBAN IN CHARACTER The entire Mosier II Area (Expanded) is located within the Urban Growth Area established by the King County Comprehensive Plan. This definition addresses both existing land characteristics and future designation/use plans for the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded). The Mosier II Area (Expanded) designation as `urban" area is also supported by the State Growth Management Act. The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan includes the entire Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) in its Potential Annexation Area and designates Mosier 11 as an urban area. Immediate annexation of the Mosier li Area (Expanded) into Renton would promote uniform governance, development, and services appropriate for this urban territory. 7 RCW 36.93.180 (9) PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL LANDS FOR LONG TERM PRODUCTIVE AGRICULTURAL/RESOURCE USE RCW 36.93.180 (9) is not applicable to File No. 2195. III. BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FINDINGS AND DECISIONS The Boundary Review Board conducted review and deliberation of File No. 2195 based upon the record of written documents and oral testimony, in keeping with applicable state, regional and local regulations. The Board focused upon RCW 36.93 (Boundary Review Board Enabling Act); RCW 36.70A (Growth Management Act); King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Policies; City of Renton Comprehensive Plans, RCW 35A.14 (Annexation by Code Cities); and other relevant regulations and guidelines. The role of the Boundary Review is to implement these existing laws; the Board does not have the authority to make law or policy. As prescribed by statutory mandate, the Boundary Review Board considered the following options: ■ The Mosier II Area Annexation could be accepted as initially proposed by the City of Renton, if this action achieves the provisions of RCW 36.93 and other applicable regulations (e.g., State Growth Management Act, the King County Comprehensive Plan and the Renton Comprehensive Plan). • The Mosier 11 Area Annexation could be modified as proposed by the City of Renton to incorporate 65 acres (Mosier II Area — Expanded), if the proposed expansion achieves the basic requirements of RCW 36.93 and other applicable regulations (e.g., the State Growth Management Act, the King County Comprehensive Plan, and the Renton Comprehensive Plan). Such a modification can be accomplished pursuant to RCW 36.93.150, which establishes the standard by which the Board may revise annexation boundaries to cities. This alternative would require all properties within the Mosier II Area (Expanded) to immediately be incorporated into the City of Renton. ■ The Mosier II Area/Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation/Mosier II Area Annexation (Expanded "B") could be denied in its entirety if incorporation would be inconsistent with RCW 36.93 and other applicable regulations. The record for File No. 2195 is detailed and extensive. The parties provided considerable materials supporting their positions. The Board has deliberated upon the complete record in order to come to a decision for the proposed Mosier II Area Annexation and the proposed alternative Mosier 11 Area Annexation (Expanded). The Board finds that: ■ Annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) achieves/advances the provisions of RCW 36.93. For example, the Mosier II Area (Expanded) annexation addresses criteria established In RCW 36.93.170 with respect to population, territory, the natural environment, service needs and service capacity, and mutual social and economic needs, et al. The initially proposed Mosier 11 Area is not consistent with the provisions of RCW 39.63.170. Additionally, Mosier 11 Area and Mosier it Area (Expanded) annexation proposals were evaluated according to the criteria established in RCW 36.93.180 as follows: RCW 36.93.180 MOSIER II AREA (EXPANDED) (66 ACRES) MOSIER II AREA (31 ACRES) OBJECTIVE 1 - PRESERVATION OF ADVANCES CRITERION BY INCONSISTENT wmi NATURAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND ANNEXATION OF PROPERTIES OBJECTIVE COMMUNITIES INCLUDED IN A NATURAL COMMUNITY OBJECTIVE 2 - USE OF PHYSICAL ADVANCES CRITERION BY ACHIEVING INCONSISTENT WITH BOUNDARIES ESTABLISHED COMPREHENSIVE PAA OBJECTIVE BOUNDARIES F RCW 36.93.180 - — — — — MOSIER II AREA (EXPANDED) — — MOSIER II AREA (31 (65 ACRES) ACRES) OBJECT tVE 3 - CREATION AND ADVANCES BASIC CRITERION BY WcoNsISTENT WITH PRESERVATION OF LOGICAL SERVICE ENABLING COORDINATED SERVICES OBJECTIVE AREAS TO ADDRESS PUBLIC HEALTH & WELFARE. OBJECTIVE 4- PREVENTION OF ADVANCES CRITERION BY CREATING INCONSISTENT WITH ABNORMALLY IRREGULAR BOUNDARIES REGULAR BOUNDARY LINES OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE 5 - DISCOURAGEMENT DOES NOT APPLY DOES NOT APPLY OF MULTIPLE INCORPORATIONS OBJECTIVE 6 - DISSOLUTION OF DOES NOT APPLY DOES NOT APPLY INACTIVE SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS OBJECTIVE 7 - ADJUSTMENT OF ADVANCES CRITERION BY CREATING INCONSISTENT WITH IMPRACTICAL BOUNDARIES PRACTICAL BOUNDARY LINES OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE 8 - INCORPORATION ADVANCES CRITERION AS ENTIRE INCONSISTENT WITH ...OR ANNEXATION TO CITIES .... OF URBAN AREA IS INCORPORATED INTO OBJECTIVE UNINCORPORATED URBAN AREAS A LOCAL JURISDICTION. OBJECTIVE 9 - PROTECTION OF DOES NOT APPLY DOES NOT APPLY AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL LANDS ... ■ State Growth Management Act policies and King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Planning Policies require logical and orderly growth. In keeping with those guidelines, RCW 36.93.150 permits the Board to modify an annexation (e.g., increase the territory incorporated into a city) to address to promote logical and orderly growth — e.g., effective governance, efficient service provision. The Board finds that annexation of the Mosier II Area (Expanded) achieves/advances the provisions of the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A). ■ The icing County Comprehensive Pian/Countywide Policies and the Renton Comprehensive Plan contemplate logical, orderly growth of communities. These County and City plans support local governance to assure balanced, sound, cost-effective governance for community members. The Board finds that the proposed Mosier II Area (Expanded) Annexation meets the provisions of the King County Comprehensive Plan/Countywide Policies and the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Annexation of the Mosier 11 Area (Expanded) would achieve that balance that the County and the City seek from incorporations IV. CONCLUSIONS The Board finds that approval of the annexation as modified advances the standards established in the Boundary Review Board Act (RCW 36.93), Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A), King County Comprehensive Plan, City of Renton Comprehensive Plan, and other state and local guidelines for incorporation of urban areas. The Boundary Review Board approval of the City of Renton Notice of Intention to annex the Mosier II Area with modifications to include the Mosier II Area (Expanded) is timely based upon the City of Renton's current and historical commitment to guide development and provide municipal services to this area. Annexation will enable the City of Renton to provide a harmonious, efficient plan for governance of the built community, environmental preservation, and protection of public welfare. (Note: Under state law, the City of Renton must adopt an Ordinance or Resolution affirming the Mosier If Area Annexation Expanded) following action by the Boundary Review Board. Under state law, the City must confirm the action as approved by the Boundary Review Board. Altematively, the Council may decide not to pursue the action. However, the City cannot modify the boundaries that have been approved by the Boundary Review Board.) 9 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY THAT, for the above reasons, the action proposed in the Notice of Intention contained in said File No. 2195 be, and the same is, hereby approved with modifications as described in Exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference. ADOPTED BY SAID WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY by a vote of in favor , in opposition, and abstentions, on this ,_ day of August, 2005, and signed by me in authentication of its said adoption on said date. WASHINGTON STATE BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD FOR KING COUNTY Judy Tessandore, Chair FILED this day of , 2005 BY: Lenora Blauman, Executive Secretary 10 EXHIBITS EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF RENTON MOSIER 11 AREA (EXPANDED): LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF MODIFIED ANNEXATION AREA BOUNDARIES EXHIBIT 11 CITY OF RENTON MOSIER 11 AREA (EXPANDED): MAP OF MODIFIED ANNEXATION AREA BOUNDARIES 11 CITE'OF RENTON COIACIL AGF_NDA BILL. Al (i_ �i £ _5'UB.1IIT7TVG DATA: FOR : I GEiV&1 OF Octobei- 10 2005 I )cpt Div- Board.... Human Resources & Risk Management j Stal't' C'ontact.........Vlichacl Webby AGEAD,�I STATUS: Consent ................. X SUBJECT Public Hearing..... Renton Police Officers Guild Commissioned Unit Contract for 2006 - 2008 j Correspondence... Renton Firefighter Local 864 Contract for Ordinance ............. -,OU6 - 2O08 Resolution............ Old Business......... 1:',VII1BITS: Renton Police Officers Guild Contract New Business....... Renton firefighter local 864 Contract Study Session........ Other ..................... RF, C'0:1 MEM)ED .-I C'TION: Council Concur FISU I1. I;11P.-IC'T. L.xpcnditurc Required AMOUnt Bud"eted APPROVALS: Legal Dept.... Finance Dept Other............ See Analysis Below "fransler/Amendrncnt.... Revenue Generated....... S111.11.-1 R Y OF. I CT10,V: Administration requests City Council authorization (or the Mayor to sign a three-year labor agrecment (2006 2008) �N ith Renton Police Officers Guild Commissioned Unit. The projected fiscal impact for each year is appro.xmiately $337,316, $347,981 and $383,232 for 2000 through 2008 respectively. Resources have been included in the 2006 preliminary operating budget to fund the first year of this proposed agreement. The primary changes in this multi -year agreement for Police Commissioned Of'ficcrs include: a 3";o COLA each year-, additional Sergeant salary step in 2008, seniority layoff language and medical program funding and operation. Administration requests CityCouncil authorization fur the Mayor to sign a three-year labor agreement (2006 2008) with Renton Fireti.,frter Local 86 4. The projected tiscal impact fir each year is approximately S402,045, $390,444 and $606,937 ti>r 2006 through 2008 respectively. Resources have been included in the 2006 preliminary operating budget to fund the first year of this proposed agreement. The primary changes in this multi -year aarccment for Firefighter Local 864 include: a 3% COLA each year; a lom,evity incentive fur one year (2008) for cnrployces \� ith 27 or more years in the LI:OFF retirement system, an increase of 25°4, in uniform allotivance, seniority layoff language and medical program funding and operatlon. S'T. I FF RECOMME.V I TIO:V: Approve the Renton Police Officers Guild Commissioned Unit contract and the Firefighter Local 864 contract for 2000 2008, and authori/c the ,Mayor and City Clerk to sign the contracts. Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 AppendixA Salaries.................................................................................. 33 Appendix B Education/Longevity Schedule ............................................... 34 Appendix C General Order No. 52.1.......................................................... 35 Appendix D. Medical Release Form.......................................................... 44 3 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 3. Any employee failing to comply with subsections B.1 or B.2 of this Article shall, as a condition of continued employment, pay each month a service charge equivalent to regular Guild dues to the Guild as a contribution towards the administration of this Agreement. 4. The right of non -association of members of the Renton Police Department based on bona fide religious tenets or teachings of a church or a religious body of which such public employee is a member shall be protected at all times, and such public employee shall pay such sum in such manner as is provided in RCW 41.56.122. 5. The Guild will notify the Employer in writing of the failure of any employee to comply with any of the applicable provisions of this section. The Employer agrees to advise the employee that his/her employment status is in jeopardy and that failure to meet the applicable requirement of this section will result in termination of his/her employment within ten (10) days. If compliance is not attained within the aforementioned ten (10) days, the Employer shall terminate said employee. 6. The Employer agrees not to subcontract work performed by Guild members to non -Guild personnel without the written agreement of the Guild. Section C. Union Officials' Time Off. 1. Official representatives of the bargaining unit shall be given time off with pay to attend meetings with City representatives or to attend Guild meetings, provided reasonable notification is given. Representatives assigned to graveyard shift may be released by 2300 hours with supervisor's approval when necessary to attend such meetings. 2. Official representatives of the bargaining unit shall be given time off with pay to attend Guild related conferences (not to exceed three working days for a single function). The allowable aggregate of such time off shall not exceed one hundred sixty (160) hours in one calendar year. Provided, that a copy of the agenda of the meeting is submitted to the Chief, at least 14 calendar days prior to the meeting and that the Guild waives the right to working out of classification pay should a replacement be needed to assume the duty of the Guild representative granted time off. 3. The Employer retains the right to restrict time off under subsections 1 and 2 if an emergency exists or when such time off would unreasonably impact department operations. Section D. Dues Deduction. Upon written authorization by an employee and approval by the Guild Executive Board, the Employer agrees to deduct from the wages of each employee the sum certified as initiation dues and assessments twice each month as Guild dues, and to forward the sum to the Guild Secretary or Treasurer. If any employee does not have a check coming to him/her or the check 5 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 b Supervisory Employees - The employee with the greatest sugewisory seniority in rank being reinstated first. C. T-4is-ree tatemen ist-&haO remain in--efev An employee may be recalled within4or two years from the date of layoff. Section B. Vacancies and Promotions. Vacancies shall be filled and promotions made in accordance with the Police Civil Service Rules and Regulations, provided, that nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to require the Employer to fill any vacancy. Section C. Personnel Files. 1. The personnel files are the property of the Employer. The Employer agrees that the contents of the personnel files, including the personal photographs, shall be confidential and shall restrict the use of information in the files to internal use by the Police Department. This provision shall not restrict such information from becoming subject to due process by any court, administrative tribunal, or as required by law. Reasonable notice shall be given the employee should the Employer be required to release the personnel file. It is further agreed that information may be released to outside groups subject to the approval of both the Employer and the employee; provided, that nothing in this section shall prevent an employee from viewing his/her original personnel file in its entirety upon request. Nothing shall be added to or deleted from the file unless the employee is furnished a legible copy of the same. Such papers shall also be made available to the elected or appointed officers of the Guild at the request of the affected employee. 2. Inspection of Papers. The application and examination papers of an employee shall be available for inspection by the appointing authority, the Chief of Police, and affected employee. Employees shall be allowed to review a copy of any adverse documentation before it is placed in the file. The employer shall maintain a single personnel file and there shall be no secret files. Materials for the purpose of supervisor evaluations shall be expunged if not made part of the personnel file. Such papers shall also be made available to the employee upon request, and to the elected or appointed officers of the Guild at the request of the affected employee. Written warnings shall be expunged from personnel files (at employee's written request) after a maximum period of two years if there is no reoccurrence of misconduct for which the employee was disciplined during that period. Any record of serious discipline shall be expunged from the personnel files after a maximum period of five years if there is no reoccurrence of misconduct for which the employee is disciplined during that period. Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring the Employer to destroy any employment records necessary to the Employer's case if it is engaged in litigation with the employee regarding that employee's 7 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 give the Guild the specific reasons for the override in writing upon the request of the Guild, and to allow a Guild representative to be present in meetings in which the assignments are discussed and these decisions are made. The division commanders will be available to speak to individual officers who have questions regarding shift assignment and bid overrides. b. Seniority is calculated from the employee's most recent hire date in the bargaining unit. For non -supervisory employees, seniority in rank is the same as seniority. For employees of supervisory rank, seniority in rank is calculated from the supervisor's date of promotion to current rank. Whenever two or more employees are hired/promoted on the same day, seniority and seniority in rank shall be determined by relative position on the hiring/promotional list. 2. Motorcycle Officers assigned to the Patrol Services Division, and Detectives assigned to the Investigations Division shall work four (4) consecutive ten (10) hour days followed by three (3) consecutive days off. 3. School Resource Officers (SRO) shall work nine (9) hours a day on four (4) days a week, and one additional eight (8) hour day every other week. Under this schedule, these employees get either a Monday or a Friday off every other week, in addition to their normal weekend off. -- - .. - : --- In •-- - 4. The above work schedules may be changed by mutual agreement between the Guild and the Chief of Police. 5. The rotation of personnel between shifts and squads shall be minimized within the limitations of providing an adequate and efficient work force at all times. When rotation is necessary, the Employer will notify the affected employees as soon as reasonably possible. Such notifications shall occur no later than fifteen (15) calendar days prior to the personnel rotation, except when such employees are probationary officers, or waive this provision in writing, or when such rotations are needed due to a bona fide law enforcement emergency. Section B. Overtime. Except as otherwise provided in this Article and when required by the Fair Labor Standards Act, employees shall be paid at the rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of their regular shift. 1. 3/3 Twelve (12) Hour Patrol Schedule Overtime: Except as otherwise provided in this Article, employees shall be paid at the rate of time and one- 9 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 Section E. Early Release. 1. Employees working the 3/3 twelve (12) hour schedule who are required to report to work for any reason other than in-service training between two graveyard shifts or following a graveyard shift, shall be relieved from duty at 2300 hot at least eight hours prior to having to report to duty without loss of time or soars overtime minimums. 2-. Employees working the 3/3 twelve (12) hour schedule who appear in court five (5) hours or more between two graveyard shifts may be relieved from duty until 2300 hours on the night after appearance, without loss of time or court overtime minimums_. it they were not relieved of duty URdeF tE-,4" above It is the Employer's desire to not have an employee work more the 16 hours in a workday. Except in an emergency situation, the employer will make every effort to ensure that employees do not work more than 16 hours in a workday. This new language shall be in effect for 2006 as a trial period. At the end of the trial period, the Employer has the option to incorporate this language for years 2007 and 2008, or may return to the language as written in the 2003-2005 collective bargaining agreement. Section F. Standby. The Employer and the Guild agree that the use of standby time shall be minimized. Standby assignments shall be for a fixed, predetermined period of time. Employees placed on standby status by a member of the Police Department Command Staff, shall be compensated on the basis of one (1) hour straight time pay for each two (2) hours of standby or fraction thereof. If the employee is actually called to work, standby pay shall cease at that moment and normal overtime rules shall apply. Section G. Compensation for Training. 1. The Employer shall have a reasonable obligation to attempt to schedule training during the employee's regular shift. 2. Training On a Scheduled Work Day, Not Requiring Overnight Accommodations: The employees agree to waive any overtime resulting from attendance at any training school or session of less than 6ip-(6) eight 8 hours on a scheduled work day, and to adjust work schedules on an hour for hour basis. The employees agree to waive any overtime resulting from attendance of any training day scheduled for 6iX-(6) eight (8) hours or more on a 11 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 lodging time associated with the training with a maximum of eight (8), ten (10), or twelve (12) hours per day, depending on the employee's work schedule. provided they are traveling during a regularly scheduled work day, or if on a day off, the training was specifically required by the Employer. For employees on a day off where training was voluntary, no compensation will be paid for travel and lodging time. 4. 5. Per diem a-rquage: Members shall receive per diem as follows; (a) $8 for Breakfast $12 for Lunch; $17 for Dinner i. If at any time during this contract period1 the City policy reflects a higher allowed per diem amount, the higher amount will be implemented. (b) Members will receive the full per diem regardless of what the actually spend. (c) ReGieptsReceipts are not required to receive the per diem. (d) Per Diem may be paid in advance. (e) If a meal is included as part of a conference or seminar registration, the per diem amount for that meal is deducted from the daily rate (for example per diem less lunch: $37.00 - $12:00 - $25:00). Section H. When the Police Department Administration and the Guild agree to a regularly scheduled shift, the payment of overtime compensation will commence with the hours worked by those affected employees in excess of that mutually agreed upon shift or schedule. Section I. In recognition of FLSA guidelines, overtime shall be computed on the base pay of the employee and shall include any allowances or premiums as described in Article 6 of this agreement in calculation of the overtime rate. Section J. In -Service Training. Employees shall be compensated at the straight time rate for up to 30 hours of in-service training regardless of whether training occurs on the employee's scheduled day off. This training is for all commissioned personnel and is developed and administered through the Administrative Services Division. Topics may include firearms, defensive tactics, blood borne and airborne pathogens, legal update or any other topic developed by the department that is administered in a monthly two-hour block of instruction. Section K. K-9 Teams. 1. K-9 officers are on the air driving to and from work and are available for emergency calls. Driving time to and from work is included in their hours of work (15 minutes each way). 2. Handlers will be paid two--{2-)four 4 hours of overtime per pay period to compensate for bathing, grooming, feeding, cleaning of the dog's kennel, K- 9 car, and similar activities performed by the K-9 officers. T#ae4wo (2) hours 13 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 required clothing and equipment and a description of the mechanics of the quartermaster system. Required uniforms and equipment shall be provided to each employee as follows: 1. Required uniforms and equipment shall be provided without cost to the employee as set forth in Police Department Policy as approved and/or amended by the Chief of Police. 2. Optional uniforms and equipment may be purchased by the employees at their own expense. 3. Required and optional uniforms and equipment shall be replaced without cost to the employee when they become unserviceable. Section C. Uniform Cleaning. The Employer will provide those employees assigned to wear police uniforms (as opposed to plainclothes) with contract cleaning services at the rate of two pants and two shirts per designated work period (e.g. seven day or twelve day), up to a maximum cost per eligible employee of $240. in . NOTE: This is based upon agreement that the cost for uniform cleaning shall not exceed $14,000 per calendar year divided by the current number of 66 employees assigned to wear police uniforms (as opposed to plainclothes). The Employer will make every effort to contract with a commercial cleaning establishment for the entire term of this Agreement. However, if no commercial cleaning establishment is willing to bid for a cleaning contract at a rate that is competitive with those establishments willing to bid on an annual basis, the Employer may enter an annual contract for cleaning services. Section D. Hazardous Duty Pay. Hazardous duty pay in addition to regular pay shall be granted to certain employees in accordance with the following schedule: I R.3. WIN .1 -10 ... all i IM.- - 21. Special Response Team - Members of the SRT shall be paid at the rate of time and one half with three (3) hours minimum when called to an emergency situation requiring their expertise. 3-.2. Crisis Communication Unit — Members assigned to the Crisis Communication Unit will be paid at the rate of double-time with three (3) 15 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 12. Bargaining unit members who pass a City approved examination for interpreters will be compensated at the rate of 3% of base pay per month while{ certified. Employees who successfully pass the initial examination will be required to recertify annually. The City and Union agree that no more than six (6) certified interpreters shall receive bilingual compensation at any one time. Should there be more than 6 employees who qualify as certified interpreters under this provision, the City will determine who is to receive the premium based on proficiency (test scores) and the need for the employees _particular language skill. 13. Effective January 1. 2008. Seraeants assianed to the Traffic Unit and Investigations will no longer receive the 3% premium as stated above unless they have not been a Sergeant for 24 months prior to 2008. Premiums will remain in effect for Sergeants who were promoted in 2006 or 2007 until 2008 or 2009 depending on the promotion date. Section F. New Positions. This Agreement shall be opened for the purpose of negotiating premium or hazardous duty pay for any new position, which is not covered with this Agreement. Such pay to be effective upon the agreement of both parties. Nothing in this Section shall preclude the Employer from establishing such new positions. Section G. Working Out of Classification. Any employee assigned the duties normally performed by a higher paying classification shall be compensated as follows, providing the higher classified person was regularly assigned during that period. Such employee shall be paid the equivalent of 1/4 hour overtime for each two (2) hours or fraction thereof worked. Such payment shall be at the time and one-half rate. ARTICLE 7 -SICK LEAVE Section A. Sick Leave. 1. Employees covered by LEOFF prior to October 1, 1977, may accrue up to fifteen (15) days of sick leave at the rate of one (1) day per month. For employees assigned to patrol working the 3/3 twelve (12) hour schedule, one (1) day is defined as eight (8) hours. No cash payment shall be made unless and until sick leave benefits are eliminated within the LEOFF System, at which time sick leave accrual shall resume in accordance with the provisions set forth in Section Two (2) herein. 2. Commissioned officers hired after October 1, 1977 shall accrue sick leave at the rate of one (1) day per month with a maximum accumulation of one hundred thirty two (132) days (1056 hours). For employees assigned to patrol working the 3/3 twelve (12) hour schedule, one (1) day is defined as 17 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 Section E. Light Duty Requirement. Employees who are injured on duty, and are expected to return to full duty, will be assigned to light duty. An employee may be exempted from this light duty requirement if under the advice of his/her physician. Employees assigned to patrol who are working the 3/3 twelve (12) hour schedule, shall stay on a 12 hour schedule and will retain their schedule adjustment pay of 5.24%. However, their actual hours of duty may change to better utilize their skills in a light duty assignment. ARTICLE 8 - HOLIDAYS Section A. The following days shall be observed as legal holidays: 1. January 1 (New Year's Day) 2. Last Monday in May (Memorial Day) 3. July 4 (Independence Day) 4. First Monday in September (Labor Day) 5. November 11 (Veteran's Day) 6. Fourth Thursday in November (Thanksgiving) 7. The Friday following the fourth Thursday in November (Day after Thanksgiving) 8. December 25 (Christmas) 9. The day before Christmas shall be a holiday for City employees when Christmas Day occurs on a Tuesday or Friday. The day after Christmas shall be a holiday for City employees when Christmas day occurs on a Monday, Wednesday or Thursday. When Christmas Day occurs on a Saturday, the two preceding working days shall be observed as holidays. When Christmas Day occurs on a Sunday, the two working days following shall be observed as holidays. 10 Any other day proclaimed by executive order and granted to other City employees. Section B. Any employee who works the following listed holidays shall be paid double his/her rate of pay for hours worked (midnight to midnight). 1. Thanksgiving Day 2. Christmas Day ARTICLE 9 -TUITION REIMBURSEMENT The Employer shall reimburse an employee for the actual cost of tuition and required fees paid by an employee to an accredited college or university, provided that those expenses are incurred: (1) in a course leading to a law enforcement related Associate's/Bachelor's/Master's degree or other job related Geurse wer ; (2) that the employee has received a grade of "C" or better or "pass" in a pass/fail grading system; (3) that such reimbursement for tuition shall not exceed the prevailing rate for undergraduate tuition established by the University of 19 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 2. For the purpose of this Article, "actual service" shall be determined in the same manner as for salary purposes. 3. Employees, who are laid off, retired, dismissed, or who resign shall be paid for all accrued but unused personal leave time. 4. On the death of an employee in active service, pay will be allowed for any personal leave earned and not taken prior to the death of such employee. 5. An employee granted an extended leave of absence, which includes the next succeeding calendar year, shall be given proportionate personal leave earned in the current year before being separated from the payroll. 6. An employee returning from military leave of absence, as defined by law, shall be given a personal leave allowance for the previous calendar year as if he/she had been employed. 7. In the event that an employee becomes ill or injured while he/she is on personal leave, and it can be established by the employee that the employee is incapacitated due to the illness or injury, the day or days that he/she is sick under these circumstances shall be carried as sick rather than personal leave, and he/she will for all purposes be treated as though he/she were off solely for the reason of his/her illness or injury. The employee shall submit medical documentation of the illness or injury from the attending physician. Section C. Scheduling and Using Personal Leave Time. The following rules shall govern the scheduling and usage of personal leave time. The minimum personal leave allowance to be taken by an employee shall be one (1) hour. �-2. Employee shall have the option to designate leave requests as "vacation bids" when the request is for a period of time exceeding seven consecutive calendar days in length (including both requested days off and regularly scheduled days off) and is submitted more than thirty-one (31) days in advance of the requested time off. 4.-3. The employee's request for time off shall be approved or denied within eight (8) days of submitting the request on the proper form. All requests for time off occurring between March 1 and December 31 of any given year and submitted prior to January 14 of that year shall be considered for all 21 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 5. For purposes of this section, "penalty" shall refer to the overtime pay provisions of Article 4. Section E. The number of leave hours used for each day off shall be calculated based upon the number of hours in the employee's work day. Employees assigned to a twelve (12) hour schedule shall use twelve (12) hours of personal leave for each day off. Employees assigned to a ten (10) hour schedule shall use ten (10) hours of personal leave for each day off. ARTICLE 12 - LONGEVITY Section A. Employees shall receive premium pay for longevity in accordance with Appendix B of this Agreement. Section B. Longevity allowances shall be payable on the first payday following the anniversary of the employee. ARTICLE 13 - PENSIONS Pensions for employees and contributions to pension funds will be governed by applicable Washington State Statutes. ARTICLE 14 - INSURANCES Section A. Health Insurance. Employees in the bargaining unit, and their dependents, shall receive medical, vision and dental coverage as specified in either the City's self -insured plan, as revised by the City's Health Benefit Task Force and approved by the City Council in September, 1990, as modified in 2003, or the Group Health Cooperative Plan. Section B. City Contribution. IR 2003 the Empleyer shall pay the monthly City'spremium for the PlaR, for eligible employees and their dependents. Fer speGif*G , dedWGtib'86, GO pays, etG. employees and theffiF dependents shall Gensult the appliGable health *RSUraRGe plan In 2006 the employee portion of medical/dental premium shall remain at the same level as in 2005. The City will pay the remaining portion of the ef4he-medical/dental premium necessary to fund the projected medical/dental program cost for the calendar year 2006. The 2005 surplus as of 12/31/2005 will be frozen and not used to subsidize 2006 premiums but will be rolled over to 2007. 23 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 . .-- -- - - :-•- - Section D. LEOFF I Employees. The Employer shall provide medical coverage of LEOFF I employees as required by law. Section E. Life Insurance. The Employer shall pay total premiums for all life insurance coverage offered by the Employer. Life insurance coverage shall be as follows: 1. Each employee shall receive a group term life insurance policy in the amount of his/her total annual salary including double indemnity. 2. Each employee's spouse shall receive a $1,000 group term life insurance policy. 3. Each employee's dependent shall receive a $1,000 group term life insurance policy. Section F. LEOFF 11 Disability. The Employer shall provide a payroll deduction for each LEOFF II employee who authorizes the Employer to deduct monies from the employee's paycheck to help defray the cost of a Guild designated on -duty disability insurance policy. Section G. False Arrest and Criminal Defense Coverage shall be provided by the Employer for all employees. The Employer shall indemnify and defend any employee against any claim or suit, where such claim or suit arises because such employee performs his/her duty as an employee of the Renton Police Department. The Employer shall pay on behalf of any employee any sums which the employee shall be legally obligated to pay as a result of that employee's reasonable or lawful activities and exercise of authority within the scope of his/her duties and responsibilities as an employee of the Renton Police Department. Indemnity and defense shall not be provided by the Employer for any dishonest, fraudulent, criminal or malicious act or for any suit brought against the employee by or on behalf of the Employer. Section H. Department contracted effextra-duty employment. All department contracted effextra-duty law -enforcement employment as a Renton Police Officer shall be authorized by the Chief of Police or designee prior to such employment. In order to ensure that officers who engage in offextra-duty employment as Renton Police Officers, have adequate liability coverage, the City will pay officers' so employed at the rate of time and one -half for top step patrol officers for such employment. The overtime provisions of this Agreement shall not apply to such employment. Time in excess of one hour shall be paid in pro rata 15-minute segments. The parties agree to make such changes in the wording of this provision as may be required to comply with the FLSA. Any officer working as a Renton Police Officer without the permission of the Department and paid directly by an employer other than the City of Renton shall not have Employer paid liability 25 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 b. Misconduct that would be grounds for termination, suspension, or other disciplinary action; or C. That he/she may not be qualified for continued employment with the Department. 3. Any employee who becomes the subject of an investigation may have legal counsel or a Guild representative present during all interviews. An investigation as used elsewhere in this Article shall be interpreted as any action, which could result in a dismissal from the Department or the filing of a criminal charge. In any investigation that may lead to discipline, the employee is entitled to have Guild representation to the extent permitted by law. 4. The employee under investigation must, at the time of an interview, be informed of the name of the officer in charge of the investigation and the name of the officer who will be conducting the interview. General Order 52.1.1 will govern the assignment of investigations (see Appendix C). 5. The employee shall be informed in writing as to whether he/she is a witness or suspect. If the employee is a suspect, he/she shall be appraised in writing of the allegations of such complaint 24 hours before any interview commences. Allegations are defined for the purpose of notification as the specific General Orders in violation. General Order 52.1.6 shall govern the notification process (see Appendix C). 6. The interview of any employee shall be at a reasonable hour, preferably when the employee is on duty. Whenever possible, interviews shall be scheduled during the normal workday of the Employer. 7. The employee or Employer may request that a formal investigation interview be recorded, either mechanically or by a stenographer. There can be no "off the record" questions. Upon request, the employee under formal investigation shall be provided an exact copy of any written statement he/she has signed. The employee shall be furnished a copy of the completed investigation 72 hours prior to any pre -disciplinary Loudermill hearings. 8. Interviewing shall be completed within a reasonable time and shall be done under circumstances devoid of intimidation or coercion. In all investigation interviews that may result in discipline, the employee shall be afforded an opportunity and facilities to contact and consult privately with an attorney of his/her own choosing or Guild representative before being interviewed. The employee shall be entitled to such intermissions, as he/she shall request for personal necessities, meals, telephone calls and rest periods. 9. All interviewing shall be limited in scope to activities, circumstances, or events which pertain to the employee's conduct or acts which may form the 27 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 2. Before an employee may be tested for drugs, the Employer shall have individualized reasonable suspicion based on objective facts and reasonable inferences drawn there from, that a particular employee has engaged or is engaged in the use of illegal drugs and/or abuse of legal drugs (including alcohol). 3. Drug and alcohol* tests shall be performed by a NIDA HHS certified laboratory or hospital or clinic certified by the State of Washington to perform such tests. (* Initial alcohol testing may be performed by a Certified Breath Alcohol Technician or any other person approved to operate an Evidential Breath Testing device.) a. Drug Testing i. An initial drug screen shall be performed using the Immunoassay (IA) method. ii. Any positive results on the initial drug -screening list shall be confirmed through use of Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry. iii. The drug panel and cut off standards shall be as defined by 49 CFR Part 40 which sets forth the procedures for drug testing in the Department of Transportation (DOT). iv. Confirmed positive drug test results shall be sent to a licensed physician who, as Medical Review Officer (MRO), will review the affected employee's medical history and other relevant factors to determine if the positive test result should be excused. The MRO will notify the department of the results of his or her review. Negative test results shall be sent to the Employer's drug and alcohol testing administrator who will notify the designated department representative and employee of the test results. b. Alcohol Testing Alcohol test results shall be released to the employee and department upon conclusion of the test. For the purpose of determining whether the employee is under the influence of alcohol, test results of .02 or more based upon the results of an Evidential Breath Testing device shall be considered positive. C. Confirmation of Test Results i. Employees notified of a positive alcohol test result may request the opportunity to have a blood sample drawn for analysis at either a hospital or certified testing lab as chosen by the Employer. ii. Employees notified of a positive drug test may request that the Medical Review Officer send a portion of their first sample to Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 Employees will be unimpeded and free from unreasonable restraint or interference and free from coercion, discrimination, or reprisal in lawfully seeking adjudication of their grievance. Section A. Definitions. Grievance: Any issue relating to interpretation, application, or enforcement of any provision contained in this Agreement. 2. Issue: Any dispute, complaint, problem, or question arising with respect to working conditions or employer -employee relations of any nature or kind whatsoever. 3. Guild Representative: A Guild member designated by the Guild President as a bargaining representative. Section B. Procedure. The steps set forth herein shall be followed unless the Chief of Police and the Grievant, Guild, or individual raising the issue agree in any particular case that the procedural steps and/or time limits should be modified. Any agreement to modify the procedural steps and/or time limits shall be in writing. In the event that no provision is made to modify any procedural steps an/or time limits, and either of the parties violates them, the grievance/issue shall be considered settled in favor of the party that is not in default at the time. If any specified participant in the steps below is absent and thus unable to timely participate, such step(s) may be completed by the participant's designee. Ste 1 The employee(s) and/or Guild Representative shall submit the grievance/issue in writing to the Division Commander within twenty (20) calendar days from the date that the grievant knew or reasonably should have known of the action precipitating the grievance/issue. The Division Commander shall notify the Employee(s) and the Guild Representative in writing of his/her decision and the reasons therefore within fifteen (15) calendar days thereafter. Ste 2 If the grievant is not satisfied with the decision rendered, he/she shall submit the grievance/issue in writing to the Deputy Chief within fifteen (15) calendar days. If the grievance is initiated by the Guild, it shall be initiated at Step (2) of the grievance process within fifteen (15) calendar days from the date the Guild knew or reasonably should have known of the action precipitating the grievance/issue. The Deputy Chief shall notify the employee(s) and the Guild Representative in writing of his/her decision and the reasons therefore within fifteen (15) calendar days thereafter. Ste 3 If the grievant is not satisfied with the decision rendered, he/she shall submit the grievance/issue in writing to the Chief of Police within fifteen (15) calendar days. The Chief of Police shall notify the employee(s) and the Guild Representative in writing of his/her decision and the reasons therefore within fifteen (15) calendar days thereafter. 31 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 Section A. Wages, hours, benefits, and working conditions constituting mandatory subjects of bargaining in effect on the effective date of this Agreement shall be maintained unless changed by mutual agreement between the Employer and the governing body of the Guild. An interest arbitrator may also change contract provisions legally before him or her in an interest arbitration. Section B. The Employer agrees to notify the Guild in advance of changes or hearings affecting working conditions of any employee covered by this Agreement, except in emergency situations and provided that the Employer is aware of the changes or hearings. ARTICLE 20 - PAY DAYS Section A. Employees shall be paid twice each month and any employee who is laid off or terminated shall be paid all monies due on the next following payday. All employees shall be paid on the 10th and 25th day of each month. If the 10th or 25tn day of the month falls on a holiday or weekend period, the employees shall be paid on the last business day prior to that period. If an employee is leaving on vacation, an early check request authorized by the immediate supervisor may be granted provided the check has been processed and is ready for disbursement. Section B. of the empleyee's payGhGGks. All employees will participate with direct deposit of paychecks. The Employer will adopt appropriate administrative procedures allowing for direct deposit. . The Employer will, to the extent feasible, assure that funds are transmitted as near in time as possible to the time at which paychecks are distributed to other employees. ARTICLE 21 - SAVINGS CLAUSE Section A. If any article of this Agreement or any addenda hereto should be held invalid by operation of law or by any tribunal of competent jurisdiction or if compliance with or enforcement of any article should be restrained by such tribunal, the remainder of this Agreement and Addenda shall not be affected thereby, and the parties shall enter, within ten (10) calendar days, into collective bargaining negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory replacement or modification of such Article held invalid. Section B. Any conflict between the provisions of this Agreement and current Civil Service Rules and Regulations shall be resolved as set forth herein. It is further 33 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 ARTICLE 23 - DURATION OF AGREEMENT Unless otherwise agreed, this Agreement shall become effective January 1, 20036, and shall remain in force until December 31, 20058 Signed this day of Washington. CITY OF RENTON Mayor Police Chief Human Resources & Risk Management Administrator ATTEST: City Clerk Approved as to legal form: City Attorney , 20035, at Renton, POLICE OFFICERS' GUILD President Vice President Secretary 35 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 3. The combined deferred compensation contribution from Sections B and C of this Appendix shall be 3.0% APPENDIX B EDUCATION/LONGEVITY SCHEDULE Employees shall receive longevity pay according to the following scale: Completion of 5 years — 2% of base wage Completion of 10 years — 4% of base wage Completion of 15 years — 6% of base wage Completion of 20 years — 10% of base wage Completion of 25 years — 12% of base wage Employees shall receive educational pay according to the following scale: AA Degree/90 Credits — 4% of base wage BA Degree/Masters - 6 % of base wage 37 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 som. -01. 0--pi .... ...all.. 41 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 i!s-wl -s•:-•. •: x••s MOM •• .s -- -• a •.• S . . w. s- x•a. a• •• s w: s••. • .. ... .. .. . .. ._•— i ... •• x .s••s s •s. s• :- :- •• s .. x • S. S x S S• x - -- - f3. -Allegation-s of-bfutaiity-Gf misuse $f fo f-c ; - G. &eac �4fi v r-rr . x •• s. s- •. -s s a --• - rsT s. s •• •- s 's w- x s •• s. s- •- sx- a s- : •- s• • . .• .. a •• .S. . . .. . SS S••S a• a • .• x. s .... x. •• a.. _ s .. .. • • . .. .. .Z—M .. .. em 11 .. .. .. . . .. . .. .. . x • S• S • a • S• S a S. • S S- S- •• -a -••S S S- S ....•a. .j .. ....M. W. W. or.-U-TwAr Mww'.7". MIMMAMM - • MM� 40 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 .T.A.11F , M ME= MWAX.' MIN MIS -will s. .... s via MMM •- -- •- -s• - - •- .s .- �. �. ■.. .s... Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 ... .. .. . .. .. .. . .. Ms.IM.. . _ 111111141111141 . . . . . . Mr. I _ •. . . . . .. . . • . . . . . . . . .. . .... .. . .. . .. . . 45 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 A. Recording, registering, and controlling the investigation of complaints against inst department members: 1. Upon receipt of a complaint, the Deputy Chief will review the complaint, enter the complaint in the Complaint Log and obtain a log number, check the Complaint Log for any similar complaints and notify the Chief of Police of the allegations; 2. The Deputy Chief will determine if the investigation is to be handled by the principal member's supervisor, or other departmental personnel with specific expertise relating to the allegation. In the case of a criminal allegation, the Chief of Police will determine if the investigation is to be assigned to the Investigations Division or elsewhere. B. Supervising and controlling the investigation of alleged or suspected misconduct within the department. 1. Deputy Chief will assign complaints and allegations of misconduct for investigation; 2. Division Commanders will ensure investigations are promptly adjudicated to ensure the integrity of the department and its members; 3. When the investigation is completed, it will be forwarded to the appropriate chain of command for staff review. C. Maintain the confidentiality of the internal affairs investigation and records: 1. The Administrative Secretary will maintain the Complaint Log and Investigation Files, permitting no access to them, except as authorized by the Chief of Police. III. The following types of investigations may be conducted as part of an Internal Affairs function: A. Informal investigation may be conducted on complaints determined to be informal primarily based upon the nature and complexity of the allegation(s). Incidents that are of a less serious nature should be reported to the member's division commander in a timely manner, which would normally be within 24 hours, except on weekends. Informal Investigation: 1. May be conducted on less serious allegations of misconduct where the supervisor or command officer has 47 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 A. As a general policy, all informal investigations are handled by the line supervisor. Any formal or informal complaints or inquiries may be investigated by a line supervisor. B. The individual assigned as the investigator will be one of the following persons: 1. The accused employee's supervisor; A member of the Investiaations Division: 3. Anyone else the Chief may designate. C. The investigating officer will commence his investigation on the basis of the complaint. If, during the investigation of the initial complaint, it is disclosed that other misconduct may have taken place, this misconduct will also be investigated, reported upon, and adjudicated. 2. The investigator assigned will investigate and report all aspects of the case in a manner which is fair and impartial to all persons. 3. The investigator will be responsible for informing the Division Commanders of the continuing developments in the investigation to determine whether to: a. Retain the accused employee in current assignment. b. Excuse the accused employee from duty. C. Assign the accused employee to some other duty where there is close supervision and limited contact with the public or other police personnel. 4. The investigator will complete the investigation and submit the report in a timely manner with a goal of completing the process within the 30-day limit. D. The investigator's final report to Internal Affairs for informal investigations will be completed in accordance with General Order 52.1.4. E. The investigator's final report to Internal Affairs on formal investiaations will contain: 1. A written summary report which includes: 49 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 G. The completed investigation will then be considered closed, and filed numerically. 52.1.2 Direct Access to Chief of Police I The Deputy Chief is responsible for the Internal Affairs component and reports directly to the Chief of Police. 52.1.3 Complaints - Notifying the Chief of Police All complaints aaainst the department or department personnelshall be directed to the member's division commander or manager via the chain of command. Division commander and manager will notify the Deputy Chief when such complaints are brought to their attention. The Deputy Chief will, in turn forward to the Chief of Police information about the complaint and how it was received. 52.1.4 Complaint Investigation Time Limits I. To achieve a speedy resolution to internal affairs issues, an Internal Affairs investigation will generally be completed within 30 days. A verbal status report will be given to the Chief of Police at least weekly. II. In cases where extenuating circumstances exist, the time limit may be extended by the Deputy Chief with approval of the Chief of Police. 52.1.5 Complainant Notification of Status of Investigation I. The Renton Police Department will keep the complainant informed concerning the status of a complaint. A. Complainants signing a formal complaint form (RPD073) will be furnished a copy of the complaint form. The form briefly describes the responsibilities of the complainant and the actions to expect of the Renton Police Department. B. Periodic status reports will be communicated to complainants signing a formal complaint, although the degree of specificity of the status report is at the discretion of the investigator; C. A letter approved and signed by the Chief of Police will be sent to the complainant informing him/her of the final disposition of their formal complaint. 52.1.6 Notification of Allegations and Rights 51 Renton Police Officers' Guild, Police Commissioned 2003-2005 H. An employee relieved from duty will be required and directed to report to the Deputy Chief, or his designee, at 0900 hours the next day. The supervisor or command officer relieving the employee from duty will also report to the Chief of Police with all the necessary reports. The Deputy Chief with the approval of the Chief of Police may extend the relief from duty as required by the circumstances. III. In all cases where an employee is relieved of duty under this General Order, the employee's Supervisor, Division Commander, Deputy Chief, and CDO (Command Duty Officer) will be notified as soon as possible. 52.1.9 Internal Investigations - Conclusion of Fact I. An assessment of each allegation of employee misconduct shall be made and classified as one of the following. A. Exonerated - The alleged act occurred, but was justified, legal and rp opera 1. Proper conduct - The allegation is true. The action of the agency or the employee was consistent with agency policy, and the complainants suffered no harm; 2. Policy Failure - The allegation is true, though the action of the agency or the employee was consistent with agency policy. The complainant suffered harm. B. Sustained - The accused employee committed the allegation of misconduct. C. Not Sustained - The investigation produced insufficient information to clearly prove or disprove the allegation. D. Unfounded - The alleged act did not occur. E. Misconduct not based on the original complaint - This is used to indicate the discovery of sustained acts of misconduct that were not alleged in the original complaint. The new allegations are investigated under the same procedures. 52.1.10 Internal Investigations - Records I. The Renton Police Department investigates and maintains records of all complaints made against the Department and its employees. These records shall be maintained securely, ensuring the confidentiality of these records are protected. APPENDIX D I, , hereby release Dr. To provide the following medical information to my employer. In accordance with sections 102(c)(B), 102(c)(C) and 102(c)(4)(C) of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the above -named doctor is required to maintain all medical records in association with the examination of me on UJseparate forms and in separate medical files and must treat those records as a confidential record with the following exceptions: Mi The above —named doctor may advise my employer regarding: UJ1. Psychological or physical fitness to perform all the essential functions of my current job classification; 2. If unable to perform all those functions, the duties that I am able to perform and which duties I am not able to perform; 3. If unable to work at this time, when I can reasonably be expected to return to work at my regular duties; 4. Any necessary restrictions on my work or duties; 5. Any necessary accommodations which may be required to allow me to perform the essential functions of my current job classification; and 6. Any recommendation for psychotherapy or other form of therapy, counseling and/or medical treatment. This Release is intended to grant no further access to my Uj confidential medical records than the Americans with Disabilities Act allows, and the examining physician is instructed accordingly. PATIENT DATE 55 AGREEMENT By and Between CITY OF RENTON and RENTON FIREFIGHTERS LOCAL 864 2006 - 2008 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 PREAMBLE 'his Agreement is entered into between the City of Renton, hereinafter referred to as the Employer, and the Renton Firefighters Local 864, hereinafter referred to as the Local, governing wages, hours, and working conditions. ARTICLE 1 - RECOGNITION AND BARGAINING UNIT Section A. The Employer recognizes the Local as the exclusive representative of all members of the Renton Fire Department consistent with Department of Labor & Industries certification (Case No. 0-1013). Section B. The elected President, or any other members of the Local appointed by the President, shall be recognized by the Employer as an official of the Local empowered to act on behalf of the members of the unit for negotiating with the Employer. The number of official representatives shall be limited to three persons. The Union recognizes the Employer as the duly elected representative of the people of the City of Renton and agrees to negotiate only with the Employer through the negotiating agent or agents officially designated by the Mayor and City Council to act on its behalf. Section C. The Employer recognizes the Local's right to operate and manage its affairs in accord with its Constitution and By -Laws. The Local agrees and covenants to act strictly in conformity with its Constitution and By -Laws, with all State statutes, and with the terms set forth in this agreement. ARTICLE 2 - UNION MEMBERSHIP AND DUES DEDUCTION Section A. The Employer and the Local agree that all employees covered by the terms of this Agreement who are members of the Local on the execution date of the Agreement shall remain members and those who are not members on the execution date of this Agreement shall, on or before the thirtieth day following the execution date of this Agreement, become and remain members of the Local. It shall also be a condition of employment that all employees covered by this Agreement and hired on or after its execution date shall, on the thirtieth day following the beginning of such employment, become and remain members of the Local. PROVIDED: The right of non -association of members of the Renton Fire Department based on bona fide religious tenets or 3 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 ARTICLE 3 - EMPLOYMENT PRACTICES Section A. Personnel reductions, vacancies, and promotions shall be handled in accordance with exis Civil Service Rules and Regulations and state laws relating or pertaining thereto. Section B. Personnel Files. The personnel files are the property of the Employer. The Employer agrees that the contents of the personnel files, including the personal photographs, shall be confidential and shall restrict the use of information in the files to internal use by the Fire Department. This provision shall not restrict such information from becoming subject to due process by any court or administrative tribunal. It is further agreed that information may be released to outside groups subject to the approval of both the Employer and the employee. Provided, that nothing in this Section shall prevent all employees from viewing his/her original personnel file in its entirely upon request. The Employer and the employee agree that nothing of a disciplinary nature shall be inserted into the personnel file without a copy first going to the employee. All disciplinary notices or memoranda shall be removed from the personnel files after Forty-eight (48) MOD'_ Personnel files shall be released to the Civil Service Commission for the purpose of promotional examinations and in the event of disciplinary hearings. Section C. It is agreed by the Employer and the Local that both parties are obligated to provide equality of opportunity, consideration, and treatment of all members employed by the Renton Fire Department in all phases of the employment process. Therefore, both the Union and the Employer agree not to discriminate on the basis of Union activity, race, creed, sex, national origin, age, handicap (unless a bona fide occupational qualification exists), and religion. (Including those persons exercising their rights under Article 2, Section A.) y Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 2. Employees will receive one "Kelly" shift every six (6) regularly scheduled shifts to reduce the normal workweek to 46.6 hours. 3 . A one -hour lunch break, and a one -hour dinner break, shall be included in the daily work schedule, in accordance with Fire Department Rules and Standard Operating Procedures. 4. Rest breaks will be allowed in accordance with Fire Department Rules and Standard Operating Procedures. Section D. Training and drill hours shall be from 0800 to 2200 hours Monday through Sunday. Night drills will be scheduled by management for the purpose of maintaining operational skills in the area of night fire suppression and interdepartmental cooperation. For purposes of this Section, training is defined to include those subjects and classifications of training as set forth in the International Fire Service Training Association Manual Third Edition and the Joint Apprenticeship Training Council. Training does not include other forms of scheduled work such as maintenance and repair of equipment and facilities, inspections, public instruction, and directly related activities unless the foregoing are being taught as part of a regularly scheduled classification of training. Section E. Employees may exchange shifts with prior approval of the company supervisor and in accord with Fire Department Rules and Regulations. No shift exchange shall be made which will result in extra payroll cost to the Employer. The employer agrees to allow the employee to complete up to (8) eight Full work exchanges in a one year period beginning in January 1 ending December 31 Work Exchanges do not have to be paid back in the same calendar year. Section F• Standby Pay: Employees performing standby duty encompassing either "Safety officer" or Suppression will be paid at a rate of Five (5) dollars an hour. Employees on the list will remain in a duty ready state and available to respond within one (1) hour for a suppression recall and 30 minutes for a Safety officer recall Employees on the list will be paid for an entire 24 hour shift unless they are activated, at that time the employee will transfer to the appropriate pay rate of 1.5 times straight time pay. 7 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 the event he/she does not serve the entire twelve months for which such payment was made, with the exception of an employee who retires or expires, in which event no deduction shall be made. In lieu of this allowance and at the employer's option, a quartermaster system may be instituted. Under this program the employer wo, purchase and maintain, including cleaning, any equipment or clothing required by the employer. Prior to implementation both parties shall agree as to what is required equipment and clothing. Periodic inspections may be conducted at the discretion of the Chief to monitor the appearance and serviceability of uniform clothing and equipment. It shall be the responsibility of the individual employee to replace any piece of clothing or equipment, which the Chief determines, is substandard. The Employer shall furnish all protective clothing or protective devices required of the employees in the performance of their duties-, such protective clothing and devices will remain the property of the Employer and shall be worn only in the performance of Renton Fire Department duties. Section C. Working Out of Classification. A Firefighter or officer who assumes the duties of a higher classification as set forth in the Fire Department Standard Operating Procedures shall be paid at the rate of " higher classification hour for hour. Section D. Day Shift Differential. Lieutenants and Captains assigned to day shift for 30 consecutive days or more (excluding light duty) shall receive an additional 5-percent (5.0%) of the employees base wage per pay period. ARTICLE 7 - SICK LEAVE Sick leave benefits are hereby fixed and established in the following manner: Section A. The employer agrees to allow each LEOFF I employee hired before October 1, 1977 sick leave benefits computed on the following basis: All LEOFF I members will accrue sick leave at a rate of - Twenty- four (24) hours per month up to a maximum balance of one -hundred sixty-eight (168) hours and at a maximum accrual rate of 168 hours per year. 9 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 The injury leave loan bank shall be used as a supplement to any industrial insurance compensation, or other disability leaves as described in Section C of this Article, received for disabilities that are determined to be duty elated. In no way will total compensation exceed that of the base pay of the disabled employee. If an employee terminates employment with the Employer for reasons other than disability, lay-off, or retirement, the value of any injury leave used from this bank but not accrued shall be paid back to the Employer through payroll deduction. Sick leave accruals earned pursuant to Section C of this Article may be applied to cover duty -related disabilities-., which exceed the injury leave loan bank balance. The balance from the injury leave loan bank is not transferable or applicable to non -duty related disabilities. Section E. In any case where a LEOFF II employee is entitled to benefits under the State Worker's Compensation Act or similar legislation providing payments for duty related injuries, the employee shall be allowed to supplement benefits received under the Worker's Compensation Act or similar legislation, up to 100% of base salary, using any accrued leave. This benefit shall exist until such time as the employee is returned to duty or is declared "fixed and stable, with a disability preventing return to duty" by the Department of Labor and Industries. Section F. Accrued sick leave may be used to care for a child under eighteen years of age with a health condition that requires treatment or supervision, including preventative health care, as specified in WAC 296- 130-010 through 296-130-500. For the purposes of this section, child is defined as the natural or adopted child of the employee, the natural or adopted child of the employee's spouse or a child under the employee's legal guardianship, legal custody, or foster care. Available sick leave may be granted upon permission from the Chief of the Department or, in his/her absence, the senior officer in charge in the case of sudden family emergencies other than the care of a child under eighteen years of age with a health condition that requires treatment or supervision. 11 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 Section J. The sick leave conversion factor of (40/46.6 = .858) will be used when converting from a 24 hr shift to day shift or from a day shift to 24 hr shift. To convert from a 24hr shift to day shift take the 24hr shift hours x.858 = new day shift hours. To convert from day shift to 24hr shift hours take the day shift hours /.858 = ne 24 hr shift hours. Rounded to the nearest whole hour. All local 864 members will be allocated sick leave hours to their payroll sick leave account based upon their shift/day shift assignment. In the case that an employee is moved mid year conversion will take place if necessary. ARTICLE 8 - HOLIDAYS The following are recognized as legal holidays and shall be taken by all personnel working a 40-hour work week: 1. The first day of January, commonly called New Year's Day. 2. The last Monday in May, commonly known as Memorial Day. 3. The fourth day of July, being the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. 4. The first Monday in September, to be known as Labor Day. 5. November 11 (Veteran's Day). 6. The fourth Thursday of November, to be known as Thanksgiving Day. 7. The fourth Friday of November, the day after Thanksgiving Day. 8. The twenty-fifth day of December, commonly called Christmas Day. 9. The day before Christmas shall be a holiday for City employees when Christmas Day occurs on a Tuesday or Friday. The day after Christmas shall be a holiday for City employees when Christmas Day occurs on a Monday, Wednesday, or Thursday. When Christmas Day occurs on a Saturday, the two preceding working days shall be observed as holidays. When Christmas Day occurs on a Sunday, the two working days following shall be observed as holidays. 10. Three floating Holidays of the employee's choice. 11. Any other day designated by public proclamation of the Chief Executive of the State as a legal holiday. All personnel working 24-hour shifts shall receive five (5) shifts off in lieu of the above holidays. The employee may at his/her option, sell back from one zero (4-0) to five (5) shifts of holiday time at the straight 13 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 Section A. The use of vacation is based on the calendar year and will be pro -rated based on the date of hire. During the first five years, and longevity breaks, the member will plot the number of full shifts accrued the prior year. The member can either be paid out at the straight time rate for the odd hours remaining, or borrow enough hours to provide a complete shift to plot. 24-hour shift personnel will not carry over any vacation from year to year. Day staff personnel are allowed to carry over up to 2 years of vacation leave. At the discretion of the Chief, any member unable to use plotted vacation due to illness/injury, or recall to active military duty, may be paid at the straight time rate or be allowed to re -plot time off in the affected year. Personnel hired mid -year will use vacation on a pro -rated basis (See Appendix C Vacation Pro -ration Schedule). The following vacation benefit schedule shall be applicable to members hired January 1 of any year: Calendar Year Hours/Shifts In Service used per year 1 St 0 2 72 hrs/3 shifts 3 96 hrs/4 shifts 4 120 hrs/5 shifts 5 144 hrs/6 shifts 6-10 yrs 216 hrs/ 9 shifts 11-15 yrs 264 hrs/ 11 shifts 16 — 20 yrs 312 hrs/ 13 shifts 21 + yrs 336 hrs/ 14 shifts Each year, in the month of September, Labor and Management will produce agreed upon vacation hours for all members. The hours will be entered by Finance into each member's vacation account to be used the following year. Section B. When a member is assigned to days, or moved back to 24-hour shift, the vacation conversion factor (40/46.6 = .858) will be used. When a member is temporarily assigned to days for longer than 1 pay period, due to illness, injury, or temporary assignment, sick leave, holidays and vacation will be converted if necessary. Upon re -assignment to shift, the remaining hours will be converted back to shift. To convert from 24-hour shift to days: 15 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 Section A. The schedule of payment for longevity appears as Appendix B of this Agreement. Section B. Longevity allowances shall be payable on the first payday following the anniversary of employee. ARTICLE 13 - PENSIONS Pensions for employees and contributions to pension funds will be governed by the Washington State Statute in existence at the time. ARTICLE 14 - INSURANCE Section A. Medical coverage shall be provided in accord with the laws of the State of Washington, RCW 41.26.150. Renton Firefighters Local 864 agrees to continue participation in the Health Care Task Force and to identify and support cost containment measures. Section B. The City will provide a medical/dental vision, -and prescription drug insurance program for bargaining unit members and their eligible dependents. The City and union agree to jointly manage the program during the term of this agreement. Renton Employees' Health Plan Board ol'Trustees is comprised of the Firefighter Union Local 864, other participating unions and the City will meet at least annually to review the program including costs associated with the program. Members of the Renton Employees' Health Plan Board of Trustees- are authorized to make changes in the program from time to time without further concurrence from their membership or the City Council during the term of this agreement. Each member union, (not bargaining unit), and the City shall have one vote when considering proposed changes to the plan(s). Changes in the program will be determined by a majority of the votes cast by Renton Employees' Health Plan Board ol'Trustees members. A tie vote will result in no change in existing benefits. In 2006 the employee portion of the medical/dental premium shall remain at the same level as in 2005. City will pay the remaining portion of the medical/dental premium necessary to fund the projei cted 17 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 PLAN CHANGES — The members of the Renton Employees' Health Plan Board of Trustees shall have full authority to make plan design changes without further concurrence from bargaining unit members and the City 'ouncil during the life of this agreement. VOTING — A tie vote of the Renton Employees' Health Plan Board of Trustees members related to a proposed plan design change will result in continuing the current design. If no agreement can be reached on design changes and cost increases exceed the City's agreed contribution, then the additional cost will be split 50150 by the City and the Members. Example — City takes first 7.0%; Cost increases 15.0%; City pays 50% of the additional 8.0% and members pay 50% of the additional 8% Section C. The Employer shall furnish to the employee a group term life insurance policy in the amount of the employee's annual salary rounded to the nearest $1,000 including double indemnity. The Employer shall furnish a group term life insurance policy for $1,000 for the employee's spouse and $1,000 for each dependent. Section D. When a LEOFF II employee or dependents health care benefits ceases the employee or dependeant shall be offered— medical and dental benefits under the provision of Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) for a period of-eigliteen (18) months following the date the condition is declared fixed and stable. . Section E. Health and Wellness program. The employer agrees to pay $10.00 per month per employee to promote health and wellness within the Renton Fire Department. The employees agree to pay $5.00 per month per employee to promote health and wellness within the Renton Fire Department. This amount will be deducted from the employees paycheck on the 10th of each month. The funds will be placed in a separate account and carried over each year. These funds shall be used in accordance with Renton Fire Department Policies. ARTICLE 15 - DEFERRED COMPENSATION/INCOME PROTECTION PLAN Section A. The Employer agrees to contribute (3.5%) of the employee's base wage per annum to a deferred compensation or an income protection plan. This contribution shall expire December 31, 2008. 19 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 recommending an annual budget, or directing the proper performance of all executive departments. 2. The responsibility of the City Council for the enactment of Ordinances, the appropriation of monies, and final determination of employee compensation. 3 . The responsibility of the Civil Service Commission as provided by State statute for determining, among other things, classification, status, and tenure appointments in the fire service. 4. The responsibilities of the Fire Chief and his/her delegates as governed by City Ordinance and Civil Service Rules and Department Rules and as limited by the provisions of this Agreement. a. To recruit, assign, transfer, or promote members to positions within the Department. b. To suspend, demote, discharge, or take other disciplinary action against members for just cause. C. To relieve members from duties because of lack of work, lack of funds, or for disciplinary reasons. d To determine methods, means, and personnel necessary for departmental operations. e. To control the departmental budget. f. To take whatever actions are necessary in emergencies in order to assure the proper functioning of the Department. Section F. Probationary fire fighters are considered "At will employees" their first year. ARTICLE 17 - PERFORMANCE OF DUTY Section A. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to give an employee the right to strike and r^ employee shall strike nor shall he/she refuse to perform his/her assigned duties to the best of his/her ability. 21 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 Section E. Employees shall have the right to request compensatory time off at the same ratio as the overtime rate in lieu of cash payment for overtime; provided, however, that such requests for compensatory time off may be denied if the department head determines that the operational effectiveness of the department would be impaired by such action. Employees assigned to the Suppression Division shall also have the ability to request compensatory time at the same ratio as the overtime rate in lieu of cash payment for overtime earned while attending discretionary training programs up to a maximum of 48 hours. This compensatory time off may be granted by the department head or his/her designee on scheduled work days when staffing is above the established norm, when the operational effectiveness of the department would not be affected and the achievement of company, platoon or department training goals would not be impaired. Section F. The Local agrees to schedule and/or sell back to the Employer the equivalent of one hundred twenty (120) hours of overtime at the straight time rate per bargaining unit member beginning in 2006. The number of overtime shifts to be scheduled at straight time will be based on the number of bargaining unit positions budgeted for on January 1 of each year of the contract. This can be accomplished by either scheduling overtime at the straight time rate or holiday sellback. When scheduling overtime at the straight time rate, the additional shifts may be scheduled in twelve 12 hours minimum increments. The increments can be divided by two members to equal twelve hours in the event of the member working the STOT needs a standby. Scheduling of the additional shifts shall fall within the FLSA guidelines. This overtime provision shall expire on December 31—, 2008. ARTICLE 20 - RETENTION OF BENEFITS Privileges and working conditions which are generally PREVAILING but not specifically outlined in this Agreement shall, in the manner presently observed as department policy, be administered and abided by, by both parties to this Agreement unless changed or deleted by mutual consent. ARTICLE 21 - GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE Grievances or disputes, which may arise involving the interpretation of this Agreement, shall be settled in the following manner: 23 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 outlined in the Grievance Procedure, Article 21. Nothing in this Article shall preclude the Employer from establishing such new positions or classifications. ARTICLE 23 - SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS Section A. This Agreement and any and all amendments and modifications hereafter entered into and executed by and between the parties hereto shall be binding and inure to the benefit of the parties' respective successors and assigns and any other governmental entity succeeding to the City of Renton's obligations hereunder. Section B. In case of any merger, consolidations, or contracting for Fire protection services by the Employer with any other governmental agency, either party shall have the right to reopen this Agreement for negotiation of any positions affected by the merger or consolidation. ARTICLE 24 - SAVINGS CLAUSE If any Article of this Agreement or any addenda hereto should be held invalid by operation of law or by tribunal of competent jurisdiction, or if compliance with or enforcement of any article should be restrained by such tribunal, the remainder of this Agreement and addenda shall not be affected thereby and the parties shall enter immediate collective bargaining negotiations for the purpose of arriving at a mutually satisfactory replacement of such articles. The Employer and Local 864 reserve the right to address through reopening of the contract, any effects that the Fair Labor Standards Act may have on the Application of the provisions of the Labor Agreement. ARTICLE 25 - ENTIRE AGREEMENT Section A. The Agreement expressed herein in writing constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties and no oral statement shall add to or supersede any of its provisions. Section B. No party shall change, modify, or amend any part of this Agreement without first negotiating arA obtaining the mutual consent of the other party. 25 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20063-20085 I:1J»1097►:I:1 SALARIES Section A. The salary schedule reflects a 3% increase over 2005 salaries. E feetia Tare^--, 1, 200 salaries shall be inn -ease by—TOA Effective January 1, 2007, salaries will be increased by 3% and January 1, 2008, salaries shall be increased by 3%. Section B. Effective January 1, 2006, the salary schedule shall be as follows: A B C D E Entry 12 mos. 24 mos. 36 mos.* -2� Firefighter 4027 4115 444-5 4444 5402-3 19.89 2� 0.32) 21.95 26.68 Lieutenant 62123 30.68 Captain 70202 (34.67) *The "D" reflects a 0.5% differential over the "C" step for those employees having a full defibrillation certificate from King County Emergency Medical Services and at least 36 months of service, or are officers. Hourly rates are based on 2430 hours per year (202.5 hours per month). A percentage differential is established as follows: Between Firefighter and Lieutenant: 15% Between Lieutenant and Captain: 13% 27 Renton Firefighters Local 864 20068-20085 APPENDIX C VACATION PRO -RATION SCHEDULE Members hired mid -year will use vacation based on the following schedule: Calendar Yr Hrs/Shifts Pre -hire date Post -hire date in Service used per year accrual/pp accrual/pp 1 0 3 2 Prorate 3 4 3 Prorate 4 5 4 Prorate 5 6 5 Prorate 6 9 6 Prorate 9 9 7-9 216 hrs/9 shifts 9 9 10 216 hrs/9 shifts 9 11 11 Prorated 11 11 12-14 264 hrs/11 shifts 11 11 15 264 hrs/11 shifts 11 13 16 Prorated 13 13 17-19 312 hrs/13 shifts 13 13 20 312 hrs/-13 shifts 13 14 21 Prorated 14 14 21+ 336 hrs/ 14 shifts 14 14 Mid year hires - Start accruing 3 hours per pay period from the starting date. For the first 5 years, on the anniversary date, the accrual will be raised to the next level. Therefore, each of those years the number of shifts taken will be based on what had accrued the prior year. The member would plot full 24-hour shifts, and either be paid out at the straight time rate for the odd hours remaining, or borrow enough hours to provide a complete shift to plot. In earning the prior year what they use the following year, they would earn odd hours in the year of the 5th, 1 Oth, 15th and 20th year anniversary, and use what they accrued the prior year. The odd hours would be affecting the vacation plotted the year following their anniversary. Mid year retirement/termination — based on the date of retirement/termination, the number of vacation hours unused for the current year, plus the number of hours accrued in the current year would be paid out to the employee. 29 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL_ AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Transportation Systems Staff Contact...... Nick Afzali, x7245 Subject: Renton Ifill Access Letter of Concurrence Fxhibits: Issue Paper: 1-405 Implementation Plan Mill Avenue Channelization; Preferred Options C and Q Graphic Concurrence Letter with attachments: Renton hill Access Recommendation including __-Appendices A, B 8c C For Agenda of. October 10.2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information ......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept......... X Refer to the Transportation (Aviation) Committee Finance Dept ...... Fiscal Impact: Fxpenditure Required... $0 'Transfer/A mend meat....... $0 Amount Budgeted....... $0 Revenue Generated......... $0 Total Project Budget $0 City Share Total Project.. $0 SUNINIARY OF ACTION: Future widening of 1-405 necessitates the existing bridges over 1-405 at Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue be removed and access to the Renton Hill neighborhood be replaced. The Mayor, Council, staff, and Renton Hill neighborhood have provided input to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) regarding the options to replace these accesses. The two recommended accesses are Option C and Option Q. Option C reconstructs the Renton Avenue Bridge over 1-405 but connects to the S. 4" Street intersection with Main Avenue (where the existing Renton hill Cedar Avenue access connects today). Option Q constructs a "stacked" roadway within the existing Mill Avenue right-of-way. The "lower" Mill Avenue ramps up from the Narco property access road to the Mill Avenue/S. 4"' Street intersection on Renton hill. "Upper" Mill Avenue, constructed in its current aligrunent over "lower" Mill Avenue, connects Renton and Cedar Avenues as it does today. To accommodate these changes and improve circulation, Mill Avenue from Houser Way to Bronson Way, adjacent to the library, will be converted to a one-way northbound street (except for emergency vehicle access). t?stablishing concurrence regarding the 1-405 Master Plan alignment is necessary in order to understand and establish the design, location, and footprint of the 1-405 Implementation Plan, for the City of Renton to be in position for funds from a potcntial regionally funded trans ion package. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize [lie Mayor and City Clerk to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State De artment of 'Transportation regarding Renton Hill ill Access. H I M 4'V', A[)%IIN 4<4 ND % 'nn, 1 h11 \rrra A�"rnda Hdl `SY O PLANNING/BUILDING/ }= PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: October 10, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: JKathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator STAFF CONTACT: Nick Afzali, Transportation Planning and Programming Manager, (x7245) SUBJECT: Renton Hill Access Letter of Concurrence ISSUE: Should the Mayor provide the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) a concurrence signature regarding Renton Hill Access? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding Renton Hill Access. BACKGROUND: The October 2002 I-405 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) established the Master Plan concept for I-405. The 5-cent gas tax enacted by the State Legislature in 2003 provides for the Nickel Projects in Renton and 5% design of the Master Plan in Renton. Future widening of I-405 necessitates the existing bridges over I-405 at Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue be removed and access to the Renton Hill neighborhood be replaced. The Mayor, Council, staff, and Renton Hill neighborhood have provided input to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) regarding the options to replace these accesses. The two recommended accesses are Option C and Option Q. Option C reconstructs the Renton Avenue Bridge over I-405 but connects to the S. 4th Street intersection with Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council Page 2 of 2 October 10, 2005 Main Avenue (where the existing Renton Hill Cedar Avenue access connects today). Option Q constructs a "stacked" roadway within the existing Mill Avenue right-of-way. The "lower" Mill Avenue ramps up from the Narco property access road to the Mill Avenue/S. 4th Street intersection on Renton Hill. "Upper" Mill Avenue, constructed in its current alignment over "lower" Mill Avenue, connects Renton and Cedar Avenues as it does today. To accommodate these changes and improve circulation, Mill Avenue from Houser Way to Bronson Way, adjacent to the library, will be converted to a one-way northbound street, except for emergency vehicles which will be provided a specially marked southbound lane between S. 2°d Street and Houser Way (as illustrated in the attachments). Establishing concurrence regarding the I-405 Master Plan alignment is necessary in order to understand and establish the design, location, and footprint of the I-405 Implementation Plan for the City of Renton to be in position for funds from a potential regionally funded transportation package. Attachments: I-405 Implementation Plan Mill Avenue Channelization Preferred Options C and Q Graphic Cc: Sandra Meyer, Transportation Systems Director Nick Afzali, Transportation Planning & Programming Manager H:File Sys/TRP - Transportation Planning & Programming/TRP-10 Transportation Planning Projects/WSUOT I-405/MOD's and MOA's/October 2005 Issue Paper Renton Hill Access Renton Hill Access Downtown Circulation I-405 Implementation Plan Draft 09/23/2005Vi- ,. t �f h; ..: ,. Ld ply . fn+. e Fire � .only; q i V. '` �; `�t '"tea, 'n'Y!� ' 'i - �' � mod:• 1k �i� -. �? ;c' ,�� - M+ *•�,�, ,) p; & 1 9-A 'i'� i,90 1 1'/lit ''gg':i ...arm .'j'y tiw y _ ✓Y �• .. : r�}_R'r C' lo 1/ ,! A0 to CO / / N ` L41/ l Q o _ UL CU el cl lool `, � \, +; r\,;\\ \ l0/,, y •'��•�. �w. � \ I ICJ �'' \\ �\ fir,\\� \�+ / • \, /` \\ ate: \ ` 1 I X 20 q . "� r • � s� ,{ .; • I �vk, �\,� % ; '�• � it /'.'K J • / ".� '' , �' to ! .,r� I I r—_?��a .._ -. — � . �....� ---�� I — _• — — — -'�- t J.. _ I _I7 '7� `� \��`'.•-� �. '�/ `\ �� > fie. .3" AL _ I i �{, r� II I .•, -`-h' '�____ ,.�—. , — it -G �'• ::..•-.•- �•' "• rj 171 it � � � � �''; m� _ � � .. -��'' � �' •• .� . 011+ LW Option C H Graphic rendering of Renton Hill access recommended Options C and Q. Source: WSDOT ` i Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects September 15, 2005 Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/ Building/ Public Works Administrator City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Re: Renton Hill Access Letter of Concurrence This letter documents that the Cityof Citx' Renton( yx;and the W Transportation (WSDOT) concur with the Renton Hill Access,:: How are I-405 Projects Defined, Funded,. As you know, the I-405 Corridor Envir6ii and FTA in October 2002 with a Recor&o'fl Alternative (the I-405 Master Plan) which pi I-405 study area including a conceptual desi and Phas design detail provided in th_e Selected, Alternati percent design. In sprtng 2003, theashingtoi Package providing more than $4 bill>on over 10 throughout the state. `Part of the o' i�` . "Nickc Master Plan "footprint" of Ren prepared for arl tti`onal regR 'U funds if they ari The Ran` on Hill neighborli widening c,f�I< 405 necessit, Avenue be reroved and ac o accesses to Reritorr,Hill, W to Renton Hill. Thy opt N 0 station. See the attache of the options evaluated.' 600 — 108th Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 State Department of .pact Statement was approved by the FHWA a, (ROD) The ROD identified the Selected A= :; transportationtmprovements throughout the narntaift g, access to Renton Hill. The conceptual'design, or approximately one .te Legislature approved a Nickel Funding irs for a variety of highway improvements 'oj.ect" funds work to advance the I-405 Footprint design allows the I-405 team to be become available. is an'lir'portant neighborhood to the City of Renton. The the existing bridges over I-405 at Renton Avenue and Cedar 'to the Renton Hill neighborhood be replaced. To replace the )T and the City closely examined 22 options for providing access aged from constructing new bridges over I-405 to relocating a fire n Hill Access Recommendation Memo for a detailed description Two accesses were recommended by the City of Renton Traffic Analysis Task Force, Option C and Option Q. Option C reconstructs the Renton Avenue Bridge over I-405 but connects to the S. 4 h Street intersection with Main Avenue (where the existing Renton Hill Cedar Avenue access connects to today). Option Q constructs a "stacked" roadway within the existing Mill Avenue right of way. The "lower" Mill Avenue ramps up from the Narco Park access road to Renton �, Washington State CADocuments and SeftingsVmoolleylLocal SeftingsJemplRenton Hill Letter of Concurrence.doc Department of Transportation Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/ Building/ Public Works Administrator City of Renton Page 2 September 15, 2005 Hill near the Mill Avenue intersection with S. 41h Street. "Upper" Mill Avenue, constructed over "lower" Mill Avenue, connects Cedar and Renton Avenues and maintains access to the new residences that front Mill Avenue. These two accesses replace the two removed Renton Hill accesses, meeting the City of Renton Fire Department requirement for two separate access points for response to emergencies on Renton Hill. In addition to these accesses, the two existing secondary accesses at Grant Avenue and Beacon Way will remain. The two Renton Hill access options, Options C and Q, were also the recommendation of the Cedar River Vicinity Charrette held in mid -July of this year. ;. . What about access during construction? In constructing the recommended Renton Hill access primary access to Renton Hill will remain open at all for switching traffic, setting bridge girders, etc. Imp, minimized, but the properties that front Mill Avenue6 construction of the new "stacked" Mill Avenue (Opti The Renton Hill Access is an important`'co, are currently underway to develop a regior position for these funds the I 405 team nee The project team needs to und&4ttnd the d same as the I-405 Master Plan in the=:vicini to Renton Hill is a critical corn development of the I'=405 Impl Utilizing th 1 ranspor�tatioi enviro " „ental process for i off ' in ; anuary 2006. This interchaixge£as well as othe WSDOT Wit, ork closely engineering progresses. TI replacements as they progr, Plan. of the Renton„section of I-405. Discussions led transportation package. In order to be in a eltip additional detail to define the project. the I-405 implementation Plan, which is the iton Hill. A solution for maintaining access be identified to complete "footprint level" nership Account (TPA) authorized by the 2005 Legislature, the >th Renton Implementation Plan Project is anticipated to "kick- �omm�al process will clear the TPA funded SR 515 (Talbot) rovements anticipated to receive additional regional funding. City staff to refine the design of the local accesses as the project team will incorporate the Renton Hill access h the Implementation Plan design. Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/ Building/ Public Works Administrator City of Renton Page 3 September 15, 2005 Concurrence I am anticipating a project that will set a high standard of cooperation between the City and WSDOT. By signing below, the City and WSDOT concur with the Renton Hill Access Options C and Q as we move forward in developing the I-405 Master Plan. Sincerely, Craig J. Stone, PE Deputy Administrator, Urban Corridors Office City of Renton Concurrence v members members members members Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects Renton Hill Access Recommendation Presented by: City of Renton Traffic Analysis Task Force September 2005 Recommendation This document presents Option C and Option Q as the Renton Hill access configuration endorsed by the City of Renton Traffic Analysis Task Force for the 1-405 Master Plan design. Major features of this design include: A new bridge over the widened 1-405, connecting Renton Avenue (on Renton Hill) to Main Avenue at the S 4t" Street intersection, No bridge crossing over 1-405 at Cedar Avenue, and A "stacked" roadway, constructed within the existing Mill Avenue right of way, which maintains access to residences (Upper Mill Avenue) and provides a connection between Renton Hill and the Narco Park access road (Lower Mill Avenue). Project Description (Renton Hill Vicinity) The 1-405 Congestion Relief and Bus Rapid Transit Project Master Plan adds two lanes in each direction along the 1-405 corridor. In the vicinity of Renton Hill, this project also includes an additional auxiliary lane in each direction between the SR 167 and SR 169 interchanges. To minimize impacts to the Renton Hill neighborhood, all of the 1-405 widening is to be to the west, away from the residences (see 1-405 mainline alignment concurrence letter and design decision). The widening of the freeway requires that the existing Renton Hill access structures over 1-405 at Cedar Avenue and Renton Avenue be removed. Description of Options The Task Force considered many conceptual configurations for access onto Renton Hill. The Renton Hill Access Option figures shows the 22 options considered. See Appendix A for figures of each option, excluding the fire station relocation (Option M). The Renton Hill access options are: • Option A - Mill Ave to Grady Way Connection, • Option B — Renton Ave to Narco Park connection • Option B1 — Renton Ave to Narco Park connection (restricted use, no general traffic) • Option B2 — Renton Ave to Narco Road connection, • Option B3 — Renton Ave to Narco Road connection (two-way / one -lane) • Option C — Renton Ave to Main Ave connection, • Option D — 7th Street to Grady Way S connection, • Option E — Cedar Ave extension to south, MAWashingtonState Department of Transportation • Option F — Grant Ave extension to south (restricted use, no general traffic), • Option G — Beacon Way extension to south (restricted use, no general traffic), • Option H — Cedar Ave to Benson Road S, • Option J — Cedar Ave to S 2nd St, • Option J1 — Cedar Ave to Mill Ave, • Option K — High Ave to Narco Road, • Option L — Beacon Way to Narco Road, • Option M — Relocate Fire Station #13, • Option N — Mill Street to SR 169, • Option P — Existing configuration, • Option Q — Mill Ave S to Narco Park, • Option R — Mill Ave S to S 2nd St, • Option S — Mill Ave S to Houser Way S, and • Option T — Renton Ave 'T'. The above access options can be mixed and matched to obtain the best configuration for replacing the removed accesses to Renton Hill and meeting the needs of the community. Design Issues and Considerations In reviewing the access options, the Task Force considered the many project features and impacts. The evaluation of these accesses considered the following: • Impacts to Residential Areas, • Impacts to Businesses, • Impacts to Park(s), • Right of Way Needed, • Fire / Emergency Response Time, • Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic, • Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves), and • Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands. Traffic operations is not identified as a criterion because only one primary access is needed to accommodate anticipated traffic accessing the Renton Hill neighborhood (see Appendix B for Renton Hill Traffic Follow-up memorandum). Using the above criteria, several options were found to be fatally flawed in that they did not meet minimal project requirements. A discussion of the fatally flawed options follows this section. Exhibit 2 shows the scorings for each of the fatally flawed options. The scoring for each of the viable options is shown in Exhibit 1. City of Renton requires at least two separate access points for response to emergencies on Renton Hill. Currently, the Renton Hill neighborhood has two primary accesses from the north, at Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue, and two secondary accesses from the south, at Grant Avenue and Beacon Way, The Page 2 of 8 Renton Fire Department supports maintaining the same number of access points, either with one primary access and three secondary accesses or with two accesses of each type (see Appendix C for Renton Fire Department Emergency Vehicle Response to Renton Hill memorandum). It is expected that multiple options will be required to satisfy the Fire Department requirements. Impacts to Residential Area(s) Minimizing impacts to the Renton Hill neighborhood is a critical element for the new access options. None of the viable options require the acquisition of any residences on Renton Hill. Options E and H have minor effects on the neighborhood, requiring acquisition of vacant property along the south and southwest sides of Renton Hill, respectively. Option Q does not permanently impact any residences, but will impact the access to residences between Renton and Cedar Avenues during construction. Subterranean easements are likely required on these same parcels for the retaining wall tie -backs in Option Q. Options B1, C, F, G, J1, M, and T do not impact the residential areas on Renton Hill. Impacts to Businesses The majority of viable options do not impact businesses in the Renton Hill vicinity. Both Options C and T impact the parking lot behind the Renton Family Services Center, requiring a small area next to the existing Cedar Avenue. Option J1 has the most impacts to businesses because of the impacts to Old City Hall and the Fire Station. These impacts are a result of the new Cedar Avenue touching down in the middle of Mill Avenue. The new roadway modifies and/ or eliminates accesses along Mill Avenue from Old City Hall and the Fire Station. Impacts to Park(s) Few of the viable options impact Narco Park, Cedar River Park, Liberty Park, or Phillip Arnold Park. Federal regulations protect parks from impacts, requiring that there are no other prudent and feasible options that avoid parks. The options that did impact park properties were Options B1, G, Q, and T. Option B1 constructs an emergency access road that goes into the Narco Park, impacting the park hillside and lower area. This option is acceptable to the City of Renton Parks Department because of the restriction of use to emergency vehicles only. Two options, Options G and Q, only have minor impacts to parks. Option G requires putting automated gates through on Beacon Way at Phillip Arnold Park. The Option Q roadway impacts the northwest corner of Narco Park, but the impacts are minimal in nature; providing a new intersection with the park access road and the new Renton Hill access. Liberty Park and associated well building are impacted by Option T. Right of Way Needed Many of the access options require right-of-way acquisition. Options C, G, and T require little to no right-of- way to construct the proposed roadways. Options B1, E, and H require the most amount of property acquisition of the options. Option B1 requires the acquisition of park property to construct the emergency access road. Extending Cedar Avenue to the south, Option E, requires the acquisition of vacant private property between the Berkshire Apartments and the Woodcliffe Apartments. Option H requires the acquisition of vacant private property between Cedar Avenue and 1-405 along the south side of Renton Hill. Options F, J1, and Q all require a small amount of right-of-way for the new roadways. Additional property under the powerlines is required for Option F to open up the access road for emergency vehicles and install automated gates. Option F only requires a small amount of right-of-way in the landscape area of Old City Hall. Option Q requires a small amount of park property and subterranean easements under the private parcels along Mill Avenue between Renton and Cedar Avenues. Page 3 of 8 Exhibit 1. Renton Hill Access Option Scoring — Viable Options Fire/ Safe Environmental Impacts to Right of Emergency Discourages Geometrics Impacts to Residential Impacts to Impacts to Way Response Drive-Thru (Grades and Slopes and Description Area(s) Businesses Park(s) Needed Time Traffic Curves) Wetlands Option H• • • Option A• • Option T• • • Page 4 of 8 Fire / Emergency Response Time The ratings for the Fire I Emergency Response Time criterion were based on times and response criteria from the Renton Fire Department memo (Appendix B). Options with grades over 15%, the maximum grade allowed for emergency response routes, are considered to be fatally flawed. The Renton Fire Department measured response times for the existing four accesses and calculated a response time through Narco Park. Options B, C, Q, and T had the best response times, as the accesses are in close proximity to Fire Station 11. Options E, F, and G had the longest response times, as all are options with access on the south of Renton Hill. The Fire Department measured the response times for Options F and G from Fire Stations 11 and 13, which both exceeded the 6 minute criteria from stations 11 and 13. Option H is located at about the mid -point of the western side of Renton Hill, therefore response times are expected to be approximately in the middle of the shorter and longer times. Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic A majority of the access options discourage drive-thru traffic from entering the Renton Hill neighborhood. Option E was given the lowest rating because extending Cedar Avenue to the south creates another north - south corridor for vehicles through the Renton Hill neighborhood. Option H has a slight possibility of drive- thru traffic, though likelihood of someone using this route is small. Option T has an increased likelihood of drive-thru traffic between Main Avenue and SR 169, utilizing the new access route as a Bronson Way bypass. The drive-thru traffic does not travel within the neighborhood, but adds traffic to the access route. All other options were given the best score in this criterion. Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves) The existing terrain of the Renton Hill areas provides some geometric challenges for design and constructing a new access street. Many of the streets had grades up to 15%, the maximum allowed for an emergency response route. Options with grades in excess of 15% are considered to be fatally flawed. Options B1 and H had the most geometric issues. Option B1 has a 15% grade on the proposed roadway, right at the maximum grade allowed. Option H also has a steep roadway grade, 14%, but also has multiple sharp horizontal curves and an intersection with limited sight distance. The best geometric option is Option G, which simply installed automated gates on the existing Beacon Road on a straight section of roadway. Options C, E, F, J1, Q, and T all had some features that made the geometrics less desirable. Options C, E, J1, Q, and T all had grades between 8% and a little under 13%, making them slightly less desirable. Option F had some small radius curves for the emergency access road under the power lines. Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands The range of environmental impacts for the options ranges from no impacts to significant impacts. Options C, F, G, and J1 had the least impacts, with no slopes or wetlands impacted. On the other end of the spectrum, Options B1, E, and H have significant impacts to slopes and wetlands. Option B1 requires the clearing of a large section of hillside between Narco Park and Renton Hill. The impacts of Option E include Thunder Hills Creek and/ or a tributary to it, which is located in close proximity to the proposed roadway between Berkshire Apartments and Woodcliffe Apartments. Option H impacts a large section of hillside between 1-405 and neighborhood along the southside of Renton Hill. Options Q and T fall into the middle of the range. Option Q impacts a portion of the north hill side next to the existing freeway for the new lower Mill Avenue and intersection with the park access road. Option T replaces the existing Houser Way crossing of Cedar River with a new, skinnier bridge. Page 5 of 8 Fatally Flawed Options Many of the access options have impacts and/ or features that make the option not viable. Exhibit 2 shows the ratings for these options for the evaluation criteria. The impacts and/ or features that fatally flawed each option range from park impacts to too steep of grades on the roadways. Options A and D are considered fatally flawed for the impacts to businesses (the recently constructed Sam's Club). In both options, the proposed roadway impacts the loading dock area of the building and replaces the Sam's Club driveway as the southeast leg of the signaled intersection. Option D is also considered fatally flawed because it exceeds the maximum allowable grade of 15% (at 17.5%) for emergency response vehicles. Options B, B2, B3, and N are fatally flawed because of the park impacts associated with each option. All these options have large impacts into Narco Park and there are other feasible and prudent options which do not have these large park impacts. Option N also impacts Cedar River Park with the proposed roadway across the Cedar River. The impacts to the old City Hall property fatally flaw Option J and Option R. The proposed roadway on each option cut through the parking lot of the office building and replace the building driveway as the east leg of the S 2nd St intersection with Mill Ave. The access and parking impacts likely require the total acquisition of the property. Building a parking structure on this property is difficult because of the space limitations with the proposed roadway cutting through the middle of the parking lot and ramping up to cross over Houser Way, the railroad tracks, and 1-405. Options L and K are also considered fatally flaw because of their impacts to Narco Park. Since federal funds were used to help fund the acquisition of the Narco Park property, federal regulations dictate that the park can not be impacted if other prudent and feasible options exist. Both options propose a connection between Narco Road and the east side of Renton Hill, with Option K connecting to High Avenue and Option L intersecting Beacon Way at Phillip Arnold Park. The proposed roadways go through the park and the hillside between the park and Renton Hill. Option K is also considered fatally flawed because it exceeds the 15% grade (at 20%) allowed for emergency response vehicles. Option P maintains the existing configuration as much as possible. Both Cedar and Renton Avenue structures are replaced and proposed to maintain the same configuration as exists today, with Renton Avenue connecting at Houser Way and Cedar Avenue connecting to Main Avenue. This option is considered fatally flawed because both roadways exceed the 15% grade (both are around 17%) allowed for emergency response vehicles. The proposed roadway grade of Option S is fatally flawed since the proposed grade is 21.5%, exceeding the 15% maximum grade for emergency access routes. This steep roadway grade fatally flawed this option in both the Emergency Response Time and Safe Geometries sections. Page 6 of 8 Exhibit 2. Renton Hill Access Option Scoring — Fatally Flawed Options Fire/ Safe Environmental Impacts to Emergency Discourages Geometrics Impacts to Residential Impacts to Impacts to Right of Response Drive-Thru (Grades and Slopes and Description Area(s) Businesses Park(s) Way Needed Time Traffic Curves) Wetlands Option B2 Page 7 of 8 Summary The Task Force recommends Option C and Q as the Renton Hill Access configurations for the 1-405 Master Plan. Option C has no impacts to the Renton Hill residential area and parks, limited impacts to businesses, and provides a primary emergency response route. The proposed roadway grade is also flatter, at 8%, than both of the existing Cedar and Renton Avenues, easing access to Renton Hill during winter months. Option Q has numerous advantages over other options considered. The main benefit of Option Q is providing a second primary emergency access route, matching the number of primary and secondary access points as exists today. The impacts to the Renton Hill neighborhood are limited to construction impacts and subterranean easements to the parcels along Mill Avenue between Cedar and Renton Avenues, Option Q also has no impacts to businesses, has minimal impacts to the Narco property as it fits within the proposed Park Master Plan. In the construction of Options C and Q at least one primary access to Renton Hill will remain open at all times, except possible short-term closures for switching traffic, setting bridge girders, etc. While the final construction staging will be determined by the design -builder, one possible scenario would construct the new access in 4 stages: 1. Close Renton Avenue crossing to allow reconstruction of the Renton Avenue / Mill Avenue intersection as a structure. Access to Renton Hill is from the existing Cedar Avenue crossing. 2. With both Renton Avenue and Cedar Avenue crossings open, build stacked Mill Avenue (upper and lower) between Renton and Cedar Avenue. 3. Close Cedar Avenue crossing to allow completion of "lower' Mill Avenue between Cedar Avenue and S 4th Street. Construct connection between new "upper' Mill Avenue and existing Cedar Avenue. Access to properties near Mill Avenue/ Cedar Avenue impacted. Utilize existing Renton Avenue for access to Renton Hill. 4a. Route traffic to new "lower" Mill Avenue access under 1-405 to Houser/ Mill Avenue. Then remove existing Renton Avenue structure over 1-405. Start reconstruction of 1-405 in this area and approaches for new Renton Avenue. 4b. Construct new Renton Avenue structure over 1-405. Open to general public as soon as bridge and approach construction is finished. Finish reconstruction of 1-405. Two accesses to Renton Hill are provided using the new lower Mill Avenue and Renton Avenue (when bridge and approach is finished). Page 8 of 8 APPENDIX A Renton Hill Access Options RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION A MILL AVE. TO GRADY WAY CONNECTION S °R40Y N4Y OC W W L\\� � In 3 OO O Impacts to Residential Areas) s",S cwg c\�y JP\N OO a Impacts to Businesses ® O O Impacts to Park(s) - O O 40 Right of Way Needed O O O Fire /Emergency Response Time i O O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic o PLAN OO ® Safe Geometric C GRADY NAY S [ BENSbN PD. (Grades and Curves) 1 14A ... j < OO O Environmental Impacts to I I Slopes and Wetlands120 j E KEYNAP i 1DD o J Bp _.....-... I .-....225 f F1 60 __.!._. � 1 40 70C V. C. 10 20 1 0.00 �S E, `E�PP 4* D 10o za0 SCALE IN FEET i. ..-. ..........- .. ...._--.-.... i. _.......... 1 40 :... _,�.� ..... ... ............... a ............. ~—~ / ! .... ... ... Ex I STING .. . GRAOJfA ._ ., .___..... 100 60 40 5-00 10.00 I5-00 PROFILE - OPTION A 20 20.00 22.00 RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION B RENTON AVE. TO NARCO PARK CONNECTION UNRESTRICTED USE M W W cc m p 3 0 O O Impacts to Residential Areas) S O O Impacts to Businesses O O a Impacts to Park(s) O O ® Right of Way Needed 0 O O Fin /Emergency Response Time S O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic O O ® Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) OO ® Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands -1 KEYMAP 3RD ST. OP S 2ND ST PLAN c-,* F4� O Oh . NARCO PARK �� o too zoo SCALE IN FEET is� RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION Bl ST RENTON AVE. TO NARCO PARK CONNECTION RESTRICTED USE (EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND NON -MOTORIZED TRAFFIC ONLY W W N cc m 3 ® O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) 0 O Q Impacts to Businesses O O 40 Impacts to Park(s) O O ® Right of Way Needed ® O O Fire /Emergency Response Time A O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO ® Safe Geometric, (Grades and Curves) OO ® Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNAP .q f,P Se 5 +Q (IRE Fp STATION OE N0. I 1 'oh HO�S�p .t� S V �N 1 120 - too 80 60 - 40 0.00 ( RENTON AVENUE REMOVABLE \\\ BOLLARDS PLAN 5.00 PROFILE - OPTION B1 PARKING FOR RECREATIONAL USE/ TURNING AREA FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES NARCO PARK 120 100 90 60 40 10.00 --• 0 10o 200 SCALE IN FEET RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION B2 RENTON AVE. TO NARCO RD CONNECTION UNRESTRICTED USE - OPEN TO GENERAL PUBLIC AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES - 20 MPH DESIGN W N w 3 ® O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) ® O O Impacts to Businesses O O a Impacts to Park(s) O O ® Right of Way Needed S0 O Fin /Emergency Response Time ® O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic 0 O ® Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves) OO ® Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands -1 KEYNAP Cfo� or fy e`r FIRE STATION OFF, N0. I I 'o" 0. NOSE c4 yc, P� N NARCO r4aK PLAN 120 100 - 80 60 40 11-57 C RENTON AVENUE 120 100 80 60 1 1 40 15.00 20.00 22-00 PROFILE - OPTION B2 ►- 0 too 100 Z00 SCALE IN FEET RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION B3 RENTON AVE. TO NARCO ROAD CONNECTION "RE STATION N0. 11 TWO-WAY /ONE -LANE ROADWAY - 20 MPH DESIGN tY W W H m • O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) O O Impacts to Businesses O O a Impacts to Park(s) O O 0 Right of Way Needed OO O Fin /Emergency Response Time Y0 O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO • Safe Geometric € (Grades and Curves) OO • Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNAP W= V �e mob N SSE N � , 4 S. �tO 1 0.� c / AVENUE 120 100 0 80 60 40 PLAN -2-00 0-00 5.00 PROFILE - OPTION B3 NARCO PARK 120 100 80 > 60 40 10-00 RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION C RENTON AVE. TO MAIN AVE. CONNECTION W N UJI 3 ® Q O Impacts to Residential Area(s) O O O Impacts to Businesses © O O Impacts to Park(s) 0 O O Right of Way Needed ® O O Fire /Emergency Response rime ® O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO O Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) ® O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNAP �^ NO. 11 pOh _ P4+5 Y �0 s x HD�S6 Qi"Ji x o y� i iJ S 3RO 5T. H H a O < x ?" w s S 47H ST 10 'Lp 0 100 500,' s SOLE IN FEET PLAN 120 __. _. .... _._ _. ... ...... ..__.__ ._._.. _...... - ...__. _-.-- -- --- 20 1 00 _ / i-NH405 -_-- _.... 80 EXI:STINL 60 f MAIN -..-..- �... __.- .• .. .. .. ! --. GROUND !.. ......_.- .._ -.... 6 0 i AVENUE -O.SIX /70' v.t' zo 20 8•00 10.00 15+00 20-00 25+00 PROFILE - OPTION C RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION D 7TH STREET TO GRADY WAY S. CONNECTION ad W W 'A m O 3 O O • Impacts to Residential Areas) 260 OO JK Impacts to Businesses ® O O Impacts to Park(s) 240 - O O . Right of Way Needed zzo - OO a Fin /Emergency Response Time 200 OO O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic 4 OO a Safe Geometric 180 i (Grades and Curves) 160 -- O O O Environmental Impacts to € Slopes and Wetlands 140 KEYMAP W120 loo ® K9 ® 80 60 qp C!Ii.7 L -2.00 6 in � N Y PLAN 0.00 5+00 10.00 PROFILE - OPTION D { rrnA2 260 240 220 200 180 160 14J 120 100 so --- 60 40 20 15.00 S TTn ST 0 100 200 SCALE Ix FEET RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION E CEDAR AVE. EXTENSION TO SOUTH -__,_ ..• •. __. - - -._ RENTON /.VENUE 5. W H - m 3 OO O Impacts to Residential Area(s) ® O O Impacts to Businesses GRANT I.VENUE ® O O Impacts to Pork(s) O O ® Right of Way Needed o Ioa zoo OO ® Pin /Emergency Response Time SCLLE IN FEET m OO ® Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic PLAN OO O Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) 260 O O ® Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands zoo �....' 2400 -0, 23U m: i AP �-220 ._.___._ 22KEYN 200 200 ISO... EXISTING 160 160 19+00 20+00 25+00 30+00 35+00 40+00 43+00 �, PROFILE - OPTION E RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION F GRANT AVE. EXTENSION TO SOUTH RESTRICTED USE (GENERAL PUBLIC WHEN OTHER ACCESSES ARE CLOSED AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES) � W W � m O 3 ® O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) ® O O Impacts to Businesses S O O Impacts to Park(s) O O O Right of Way Needed OO ® Fire /Emergency Response Time ® O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO O Safe Geometncs (Grades and Curves) ® O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNAP 380 - 360 - �3a0 - w 320 300 - 280 10.00 NENTON AVENUE S. GATES -.-- __ GRANT AVENUE S. s PLAN I5.00 20.00 PROFILE - OPTION F NIGH AVENUE S. ►- —160 2 o Ioo 200 SCALE IN FEET 380 360 340, 320= 300 280 25+00 S RENTON HILL ACCESS <`FyGF s OPTION G BEACON WAY EXTENSION TO SOUTH `N'LL" ARNOLD PARK RESTRICTED USE (GENERAL PUBLIC WHEN OTHER ACCESSES CLOSE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE VEHICLES) BEACON MAT 5 W W Vol AUTOMATED oUJI p 3 GATE GATE 0 O O Impacts to Residential Areas) ® O O Impacts to Businesses 0 '00 '00 OO O Impacts to Park(s) sULE IN FEET ® O O Right of Way Needed PLAN OO ® Fire /Emergency Response Time ® O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic ® O O Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) ® O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNLAP- og> Q 56 1K,1i I ' A A A • A MGM Tr1rYw RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION H UNSAFE INTERSECTION TUNNEL AT BENSON RD. POOR --10 UNDER1405 SIGHT DISTANCE CEDAR AVE. TO BENSON ROAD S. qo" N` 9% W W N G 3 Q O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) O Q O Impacts to Businesses O Q O Impacts to Park(s) O O O Right of Way Needed OQ O Fire /Emergency Response Time O O O Discourages Drive—Thru Traffic OO O Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves) OO O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNLAP SAWS 2 N CLUB , I r / SHARP HORIZONTAL CURVES AND STEEP GRADE / O 200 SC4E IN FEE' PLAN 240 ....... ...... .. ... ..._... .. _. _..._ _. _... -..__. _ __ _.. .. - - _ - .... 240 .1.60% Q-- 220..... _........ ........ ................. .....:. ........... :. ................ . _ ..... ............: zzo zoo............... . ............... ..... zoo f 325'. v.C. /.. z160 .. __...._. .__.._.. .. .... ......... _ W w140.. ... ... ........ 4 . .... ..... ..... __..: - _.... .. ...... .. ...... .... _._ 1402 / E%ISTING ... 360' V.C. GROUND 120 -. .. t BEN50N ........... �.... ...... -..... _ ......... ........... ..__....... ._._. _..__. .. ... .. .... ... . 120 A01D SB-1405 - . l00-. _....� -... .I I .��. ... ... .... _.... _ ._....__ ....... ._..... _._ __.. _._. _. _..{ ... .... ..................... - l00 80 .. '_P_. f.1..._. f..te'41405 .. .._�.... ___..-.. .......... ...:.. _.. _: ... ......... ......... ... 80 60 i 60 9.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 PROFILE — OPTION H RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION J 'P CEDAR AVE. TO S 2ND ST 2ND STREET FIRE BNSF 9 y pax STgT ION °F J j i W � tioa NOOSE . O W © O O Impacts to Residential Areas) S 3R0 ST. OO 0 Impacts to Businesses ® O Q Impacts to Park(s) O O ® Right of Way Needed . ® O O Fire /Emergency Response Time / �--'00 Y © O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic H 0 Iao zoo SCgLE IN iEET O O O Safe Geometrics PLAN (Grades and Curves) _ 140 01 V. _.. .._....__ _____._-._ .. _....... ....___� __..__... -. _.....__.. ....__140 ® O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands 12a --- 120 L622 KEYNAP A NB 1-405 SB :1-005.- ' 200 V C. -.-_ _ ....._ 80 m so O i w -_. t - - MILL AVEN' E S. .. .... _._. 0 — EXISTI m 230 V.C: NOUSER WU GROUNDNG O 20 :.... BNSF RR - .--- 20 E VY ! 0 0.00 10-00 15. '� 5•00 }I+ PROFILE - OPTION J RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION Jl CEDAR AVE. TO MILL AVE. tY W W at L 3 O Q Impacts to Residential Areas) 0 Q • Impacts to Businesses • O O Impacts to Parks) O O O Right of Way Needed OO • Fin /Emergency Response Time • O O Discourages Drive -Thar Traffic OO O Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) ® O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNLAP f IRE STATION i ^ NO. II i a 140 120 100 80 J 60 40 20 0 0.00 S ]RD ST. e W o 5.00 10-00 15.00 PROFILE - OPTION A v ja ao 4 O�- oy RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION K ad aJ tit N a 3 O O O Impacts to Residential Areas) C) Q Q Impacts to Businesses O O M Impacts to Parks) Q Q Q Right of Way Needed OO M Fire /Emergency Response Time d (7) y Q Q Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic 1 O O X Safe Geometrics 1 (Grades and Curves) O O Q Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYMAP RENTON AVE 5 RENTON AVE 5 /� IMPACTS IMPACTS ISOLATED RESIDENTIAL AREA HARED PARK 0 l0o 200 SCALE IN FEET PLAN 340 320 300 280 260 240 220 - 200 - 180 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 PROFILE_ - OPTION _Kr j 9e 105 O \ <9 0 �C d '+e CFHTf�OH CO capC� fCrr h Tfq - 20o m Iso = 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 30.00 133A NI 31YDs 000 002 0 W8Vd cidvN 40 NVId j b'W Leh o� dVWA3)1 spualpM puD -doll of WDdWI ID{UGLUUOJuw3 • 0 0 (soAJn:) puo sepDJ9) s3ploww!) *Jos 0 0 0 a!UwjL eu41-*Aud soOmnoma O 0 . AWIl owodsoll /VYa6Jow3/ oJld • 0 0 PV-N ADM P #45!3 0 0 0 (s)31JDd o+ q-d-I a 0 0 f•s —!-g of st-d-I 0 0 • (s)DoN,D!Wp!sea at DWI 0 0 0 W O H m eir m l NOIldO SS30:)tl IIIH NO1N38 RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION N MILL STREET TO SR169 � W 0 m ® O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) 40 O O Impacts to Businesses O O 11 Impacts to Park(s) O O • Right of Way Needed OO a Fin /Emergency Response Time O O • Discourages; Drive-Thru Traffic Y OQ 0 Safe Geomeina S AVENUE (Grades and Curves) 120 .X _--9- 3• — OO ® Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands 100 KEYMP 80 . So�oS p+R P ' 20 o=, Q QtVd~ NARCD PARK PLAN O 100 200 SCALE IN FEET 120 400' Y.C. __ ._.; ... I 0 40o :V.C. PARK (SR169 ACCEESS ROID W 60 J .... ....._. _ -. .. __... - eo' v c — _ ExOurtN _ 40 _ _ _ I_ 40 400, V.C. CEDAR: RIVER 0 0 10.00 15.00 20.00 25-00 30.00 34.00 PROFILE -OPTION N A%ftr L a == FIR 5T41 EF' O RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION P -SHEET 1 -_ op ACCESS 3 BNSF s aRo sT. RENTON ACCESS N W W N O LU 3 ® Q Q Impacts to Residential Area(s) �' o� CEDAR ACCESS O O ® Impacts to Businesses • 0 0 Impacts to Pork(s) i +` • O O Right of Way Needed 5 4TN ST �� y F�—�1___-4 0 0 a Fin /Emergency Response Time yOa ° SC ALE FEE10° • O O Discourages Drive -They Traffic PLAN O O a Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) • O O Environmental Impacts to 100100 - Slopes and Wetlands 6 KEYMAP 80 gg.... ........ .. _..______ 80 300': V.C. LL 40 .-.._ ' ° ........ lZ,�. - -.:.. .. ....... ..60T-.--i-EM{5T1 GROUND z 40 20 ?Do. V-C. NE TUNL UNDER RR , 20 (( RELOCATED 200' V.C. ddMkikSRR TRACKS ',, p..i...... ..', ........... _�. ._ ............. p -20 -20 10.00 15-00 20-0 `• �ii� PROFILE — OPTION P, ACCESS 3 RENTOM HILL ACCESS OPTION P -SHEET 2 a: aJ W N m 3 O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) O O O Impacts to Businesses O O Impacts to Pork(s) O O Right of Way Needed OO X Fire /Emergency Response Time Y O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic Q Q R Safe Geometric i (Grades and Curves) OO Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNLAP 160 _ .... .. .. ... .. -. .. ......... .... ............. ... ...... 160 1.40 -. --_;6. ' V .• _ .. - GRADE EXCEEDS 15% .: .- 140 MAX: ALLOWED FOR EMERGENCY RESPONSE 120 ..... .....{ ...... .l... .. .. _. .. .. .- . .. 120 1.nz E 9 IvENVE S. i > N gg V.C. I Sit -• W 80 1 •.OS I1-.o5 I 80 30' V.C. L�^ I ao 'EXI5TIN6 — x ,rNo0N0 0 . ...... «............ ao 20 20 9-00 15.00 20-00 PROFILE -OPTION P, CEDAR ACCESS 160 160 YlIl AVEN�E S. . 150' V:C. GRADU EX6EEDS.15% 140 MAX. ALLOWED : FOR 140 EMERGENCY RESPONSE 120 . ........... Izo �2 0100 .. .'. z.0 v.c. 100, W 80 — 'Ss Ek ISTINO 60 200•V.C. 40 40 20 20 9.00 15.00 20.00 PROFILE - OPTION__ P, RE__NTON ACCESS RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION Q MILL AVE 5 TO S 2ND ST 09 aJ W Q k m O 3 OO O Impacts to Residential Area(s) 40 O O Impacts to Businesses O O O Impacts to Pork(s) O O O Right of Way Needed ® O O Fin /Emergency Response Time ® O O Discouroges DmF�Thru Traffic OO O Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves) E O O O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYMAP 120 too 80 60 <0 � 10.00 viI Q'A,� S t0 H t5.00 PLAN PROFILE - OPTION Q PARKING LOT FUTURE NARCO PARK 0 t00 2 00 SCALE IN FEET 120 100 ao 60 —4 40 30.00 is==. .� RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION R MILL AVE S TO NARCO PARK � W W no,Q m 3 • O O Impacts to Residential Area(s) O O a Impacts to Businesses ® O O Impacts to Park(s) O O • Right of Way Needed • O O Fire /Emergency Response Time • O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO • Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) SO O Environmental impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNAP BNSF �o S 2ND ST FIRE \ OPTION R ST 0 \ o h� J Qtf, S 7RD ST. 1 y e w > PLAN 120 100 80 60 40 0-00 5.00 PROFILE - OPTION R 120 100 80> 60 CO 10.00 Q JV g'a e Pp F° o , oh , ze 0 100 200 SCALE IN FEET RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION S MILL AVE 5 TO ROUSER WAY S W W 09 00 p 3 • O O Impacts to Residential Areas) 0 O O Impacts to Businesses S O O Impacts to Pork(s) • O O Right of Way Needed OO a Fire /Emergency Response Time OO OO Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic a Safe Geometric (Grades and Curves) ® KEYNAP O Q Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands S 7Ho ST. OPTION S eoos�`a N Z gm S 4TH ST ~ PLAN RENTON HILL ACCESS OPTION T MILL AVE 5 TO ROUSER WAY S. W W in O m 3 + ® O — 0� 00 O Impacts to Residential Area(s) SCALE IN FEET • O O Impacts to Businesses O O O Impacts to Parks) ® O O Right of Way Needed O Q O Fire /Emergency Response Time 40 O O Discourages Drive-Thru Traffic OO 40 Safe Geometrics (Grades and Curves) OO O Environmental Impacts to Slopes and Wetlands KEYNLAP 100 _ _ 2al.�; E__ BO• Z __--.0 b- n yn .._a . Nn ................._a n aO _.-_.-- �0 ow ow w -0.74X 40 .. -. _ . -- -.. _:. _ - _-......................:.............. . O 1.00.00 ELEV.47.00 20 P.V.I. 0.00 OPTION TI OF RI +` m 0 a OPTION NpOSfR rr S a F sB 1-405 i OPTION T NE NB 1-405 OFF -RAMP Ml LL AVE 5 _.. �P 5.00 10.00 15.00 20•00 PROFILE - OPTION T1 AND T2 Lt06RtV ?0l* NB 1-405 OFF -RAMP 100 80 60� 40 20 25.00 M�.I.M� tiY .7Mww1.I TrK.ru4. APPENDIX B Renton Hill Traffic Follow-up Memorandum Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —1W, Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 To: Stacy TrusslerlRoss Fenton From: Patty RubstellolKarl Westby Subject: Renton Hill Traffic Follow-up A capacity analysis was conducted to update the future traffic operations of the proposed WSDOT 1-405 Implementation Plan project. This memorandum discusses the results of this analysis as they apply to the Renton Hill neighborhood. The operational analysis results incorporate the comments received by the neighborhood related to traffic distribution on the east side of 1-405. Future Volumes The analysis was conducted for year 2030 AM and PM peak hour conditions. To determine future traffic volumes, forecasts were developed using the Puget Sound Regional Council, City of Renton, and historical data sources. Using existing counts as a starting point, traffic volumes to and from the Renton Hill neighborhood using the Cedar and Renton Avenue crossings were projected to year 2030. The AM peak hour traffic volume (both crossings, both directions) was projected to increase from 130 vehicles per hour to 240 vehicles per hour, a 185% increase. The PM peak hour traffic volume (both crossings, both directions) was projected to increase from 290 vehicles per hour to 620 vehicles per hour, a 214% increase. Although the Renton Hill neighborhood is already developed, these projections assume increased density, new homes, and an increase in the number of trips generated by individual households. It is likely that all of these increases will not be realized in year 2030, however the use of these future year numbers results in a conservative evaluation of traffic operations. If these future year volumes are not realized, traffic operations would be better than those presented below. Compared to a Do Nothing option, the year 2030 forecasts show lower volumes on Main Avenue South. The additional lanes on 1405 and the additional freeway access at Talbot Road South in the Implementation Plan remove some of the traffic from Main Avenue South and place it on 1-405. 2030 Operational Analysis Operational analysis was conducted for the AM and PM peak hours using the Corsim analysis software. In the Implementation Plan, the traffic using the Cedar Avenue South crossing was reassigned to the Renton Avenue South crossing. The reassigned traffic was distributed on the east side of 1-405 as follows: 40% of the traffic assigned to Mill Avenue South, 60% of the traffic assigned to Cedar Avenue South. Assuming three-way stop control, the intersection of the Renton Avenue South/Mill Avenue South is projected to operate at Level of Service A for both AM and PM peak hour in 2030, The maximum queue of vehicles at the intersection is projected to be four vehicles for the southeast approach in the PM peak hour. The other intersection approaches have projected maximum queues of two to three vehicles. A comparison was also made between the 2030 Do Nothing alternative and the 2030 Implementation Plan for all vehicles accessing Renton Hill. Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —1081h Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425456-8600 Trip Direction 2030 Do Nothing 2030 Implementation Plan AM PM AM PM From Renton Hill 10.4 31.7 11.4 37.9 To Renton Hill 13.8 1 33.0 20.3 31.7 Weighted Average Vehicle Delay in Seconds In the Do Nothing alternative, the AM Peak hour the weighted average vehicle delay for vehicles accessing the Renton Hill neighborhood was estimated at 10.4 seconds. The AM peak hour Implementation Plan average delay for the same movements was 11.4 seconds. For vehicles leaving Renton Hill, the Do Nothing average delay was 13.8 seconds. The Implementation Plan was 20.3 seconds. For the 2030 PM peak hour Do Nothing alternative, the weighted average vehicle delay for vehicles accessing the Renton Hill neighborhood was estimated at 31.7 seconds. The PM peak hour Implementation Plan average delay for the same movements was 37.9 seconds. For vehicles leaving Renton Hill, the Do Nothing average delay was 33.0 seconds. The Implementation Plan was 31.7 seconds. Summary Using a conservativety high estimate of future year traffic volumes, the intersection of Renton Avenue South/Mill Avenue South is projected to operate at LOS A for the AM and PM peak hours. Maximum queues at this intersection are less than five vehicles. A comparison Do Nothing and Implementation Plan travel to and from Renton Hill for year 2030 AM and PM peak hours show little change in average delay. The average delay change ranged from a 1.3 second reduction to a 6.5 second increase depending on time and direction. Please contact Karl Westby if you have any questions or concerns. 700 M. 500 M1 300 200 100 AM Peak Hour Volume Comparison of 1-405 Overcrossings 2002 2030 Do Nothing Alternative 2030 Implementation Plan ■ Renton Avenue S Overcrossing I� Cedar Avenue S Overcrossing 700 600 500 d 400 0 Y 300 a 2 a MOK111] 100 PM Peak Hour Volume Comparison of 1-405 Overcrossings 2002 2030 Do Nothing Alternative 2030 Implementation Plan ■ Renton Avenue S Overcrossing ® Cedar Avenue S Overcrossing -.-..-......._.__.._..._..... _......-..._....--- - APPENDIX C Emergency Vehicle Response Renton Fire Department Emergency Vehicle Response to Renton Hill Background: WSDOT is proposing a change to the primary access routes to Renton. This change is a reduction from two primary access routes to one. Currently, there are two secondary access routes to Renton Hill to be used by Police and Fire when the primary access is not available. These secondary access routes are also used for routine and special circumstances related to providing City services to the residents of Renton Hill in the most efficient manner. Method: Renton Fire apparatus were used to drive both the current primary and current secondary access routes to Renton Hill from Station I 1 and Station 13. Response times for aid cars, engines and truck companies were measured. Times were measured using stopwatches and the Department's existing method for calculating emergency response. State Law and Department policy do not allow code red response for non -emergency situations. The times for the proposed Narco access were estimated based on known information on the grade of the access route and the distance as calculated by the City of Renton Transportation division. Emergency Response Criteria: Renton Fire Department emergency response criteria are as follows: I . All code red call response is six minutes from the time of dispatch to the time of arrival at the address requesting service. The goal is four minutes or less. All responses over six minutes are evaluated to determine what the mitigating factors were. These may include subsequent calls, time of day and traffic, response vehicle location at the time of call. 2. For full first alarm response to larger emergencies such as house fires, the goal is 8 minutes for all first alarm units. This include three engines, one truck company, one aid car and one command vehicle. 3. Times were measure from each station to the intersection of 7`h and Renton Avenue. This intersection was chosen due to its location at the center of Renton Hill and at close to the highest grade on Renton Hill. These times were taken during the mid -week morning hours. Traffic was light, the weather was clear and the streets were dry. These are considered optimal conditions by the Renton Fire Department. Based on the traffic and weather during the data collection period and analysis of calls to Renton Hill for the period of 2001 thru 2003, a 10% response time increase was added to the times recorded. Results: Aid Car Engine Ladder Engine Sta. II Sta.11 Sta.11 Sta.13 Mill Access 2:56 3:14 4:02 7:46 4th Avenue 3:27 3:58 4:41 7:22 Grant * 7:19 7:28 8:14 6:25 Beacon * 8:24 8:46 10:11 7:17 Narco** 4:00 4:16 5:23 8:49 The gates currently in place at Beacon and Grant were opened prior to the measuring of response times to simulate the presence opticom gates at these locations. ** The response times of the proposed Narco access were arrived at by calculating the distance and grade and measuring actual emergency vehicle response for similar distance and grade. This time was then added to the time to the base of the Mill access and the time from the intersection of Renton and Mill Ave to the intersection of 7'h and Renton Avenue. Analysis: A single primary access to Renton Hill proposed by WSDOT does not significantly impact emergency vehicle response times to Renton Hill. However, if this primary access is blocked or is in anyway unavailable, the secondary access at Grant Avenue or Beacon Way must be utilized. Based on data using these secondary response routes, response times are significantly longer than what the Fire Department allows. Station 11 units take, on average, an additional 4 minutes to respond to Renton Hill using the existing secondary access at Grant Avenue. These response times are longer than Renton Fire Department guidelines allow. The data shows that emergency response from Station 11 using the proposed Narco access is approximately 3 minutes faster than using the Grant Avenue access. This secondary access option is preferred by the Fire Department for access to Renton Hill by the primary responding Fire Station, which is Station 11. The secondary accesses off Beacon Way and Grant Avenue are both needed to properly serve Renton Hill and the multi -family housing accessed off Grant Avenue regardless of what the final configuration of I-405 and the primary access from downtown Renton are. Renton Fire Department continues to support three secondary access routes to Renton Hill if a single primary access route is constructed. ram. -fin j Nc 9 .✓.r�wCVaL UTILITIES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT Date /0-10-'�005 October 10, 2005 Engineering Consultant Agreement with HDR Engineering for Construction Phase Assistance for Maplewood Treatment Improvements Addendum No. 3 to CAG-03-168 (Referred October 3, 2005) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the Addendum No. 3 to the consultant agreement CAG-03-168 with HDR Engineering, Inc. in the amount of $134,211.00 for additional engineering services assistance for the construction of the Maplewood Water Treatment Improvements project L�--- Rdridy Corman, Chair (� X L Lqb-9 Dan Claws , Vice C air Don Persson, Member cc: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor APPrIOVED BY UTILITIES COMMITTEE CITY C®UNCiL ! COMMITTEE REPORT Date October 10, 2005 CIP FUND TRANSFER - SW 7" STREET DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT PHASE II - LIND AVE SW TO MORRIS AVE S. (Referred September 12, 2005) The Utilities Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve the transfer of $130,000 from the SW 71h Street Drainage Improvement Project Phase II — Lind Ave SW to Morris Ave S (account#421.000600.018.5960.0038.65.065430) to the following Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program project accounts: • $50,000 to the Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update Project (account # 421.000600.018.5960.003 8.65.065287) • $80,000 to the N 26th Street and Park Place N Storm Improvement Project (account # 421.000600.018.5960.003 8.65.065330) The transferred funds will be used for consultant modeling, construction, easement acquisition and other project costs. andy Corman; Chair (— X C V- S tcb Dan Clawson, Vice Chair X Don Person, Member cc: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Direcbr Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor Nenita Ching, PBPW Principal Financial and Admin Analyst M i Ke Zat'ley, FIS Rdm1n. The Finance Committee approves for payment on October 10, 2005, claim vouchers 241479-241977 and 2 wire transfers, totaling $2,748,053.95 , and 588 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 60209- 60440, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $1,894,637.03 . Don Persson, Chair Toni Nelson, Vice -Chair Denis Law, Member BY C1TV C> N,CiL Date io-lo- aoas TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT October 10, 2005 SR 167 Mainline Alignment — Renton Southern City Limit to I-405 Concurrence Letter (Referred October 3, 2005) The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the SR 167 mainline alignment from the southern Renton city limit to I-405. ��Mzw& %11 La Marcie Palmer, Chair Don Persson, Vice -Chair c 6 f 2-- Randy Corman, Member cc: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator Sandra Meyer, Transportation Systems Director Nick Afzali, Transportation Systems Planning and Programming Manager Connie Brundage, Transportation Systems Administrative Secretary TRANSPORTATION/AVIATION COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT October 10, 2005 JA ®a1 /0-l0- a00S Bosair, LLC Lease Agreement LAG 05-004, and AcuWings, LLC Operating Permit and Agreement for sublease from Bosair, LLC. (Referred July 11, 2005) The Transportation/Aviation Committee recommends approval of a new lease agreement with Bosair LLC, LAG 05-004. The Transportation/Aviation Committee further recommends approval of an Operating Permit and Agreement with AcuWings, LLC to sublease from Bosair, LLC for the purposes of flight training services, aircraft rental and the sale of pilot supplies to the general public. Don Persson, Vice -Chair a Randy Corm , Member cc: Connie Brundage, Transportation Admin Secretary Susan Campbell -Rehr, Airport Secretary CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 3 77Y A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (CHERIE LANE; FILE NO. LUA-05-073FP). WHEREAS, a petition for the approval of a final plat for the subdivision of a certain tract of land as hereinafter more particularly described, located within the City of Renton, has been duly approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department; and WHEREAS, after investigation, the Administrator of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department has considered and recommended the approval of the final plat, and the approval is proper and advisable and in the public interest; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that appropriate provisions are made for the public health, safety, and general welfare and for such open spaces, drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks and recreation, playgrounds, schools, schoolgrounds, sidewalks and other planning features that assure safe walking conditions for students who walk to and from school; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the public use and interest will be served by the platting of the subdivision and dedication; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION IL The final plat approved by the Planning/Building/Public, Works Department pertaining to the following described real estate, to wit: See Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof as if fully set forth 1 RESOLUTION NO. (The groperty, consisting of approximately 4.98 acres, is located in the vicinity of S. 35 Street and Wells Ave. S.) is hereby approved as such plat, subject to the laws and ordinances of the City of Renton, and subject to the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department dated September 30, 2005. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES. 113 5:10/05/05:ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2 CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE WA 98007 EXHIBIT A Legal Description Core Project No: 03090A 04/13/05 THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; EXCEPT THE NORTH 330 FEET; ALSO EXCEPT THE EAST 660 FEET.