The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil 06/13/2005AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 13, 2005 Monday, 7:30 p.m. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. SPECIAL PRESENTATION: Police Department presentation to Fred Meyer 4. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 5. 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. 6. 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 June 6, 2005. Council concur. b. Development Services Division recommends approval, with conditions, of the Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat; 19 single-family lots on 4.6 acres located east of Rosario Ave. NE and north of NE 4th St. Council concur. (See 9. for resolution.) c. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department recommends approval to modify the existing designated residential targeted areas for the multi -family housing property tax exemption and to improve the clarity or intent of the project eligibility requirements. Refer to Planning and Development Committee; set public hearing on 6/27/2005. d. Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department submits proposed 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendments. Refer to Planning and Development Committee and Planning Commission. e. Human Resources and Risk Management Department recommends approval of the 2005 Group Health Cooperative medical coverage agreements for LEOFF I Employees, LEOFF I Retirees, and all other active employees. Refer to Finance Committee. f. Utility Systems Division recommends approval of an agreement in the amount of $118,664 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. to design the emergency power generation facilities for the City of Renton power system. Council concur. 7. CORRESPONDENCE UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Community Services Committee: Heidi Beckley Appointment to Library Board b. Finance Committee: Vouchers; Carry Forward Ordinance* (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) 9. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Resolution: Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat (see 6.b.) Ordinance for first reading: Carry forward requests and additional appropriations (see 8.b.) Ordinance for second and final reading: Abandoned shopping carts (1st reading 6/6/2005) 10. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 11. AUDIENCE COMMENT 12. 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 11:00 AM & 9:00 PM, WEI). & FRI. AT 9:00 AM & 7:00 PM AND SAT. & SUN. AT 1 :00 PM & 9:00 PNI RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting June 13, 2005 Council Chambers Monday, 7:30 p.m. MINUTES Renton City Hall CALL TO ORDER Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. ROLL CALL OF TERRI BRIERE, Council President; DENIS LAW; DAN CLAWSON; TONI COUNCILMEMBERS NELSON; RANDY CORMAN; DON PERSSON; MARCIE PALMER. CITY STAFF IN KATHY KEOLKER-WHEELER, Mayor; JAY COVINGTON, Chief ATTENDANCE Administrative Officer; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; BONNIE WALTON, City Clerk; GREGG ZIMMERMAN, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator; MIKE WILSON, Interim Finance and Information Services Administrator; CHIEF GARRY ANDERSON, Police Department. SPECIAL PRESENTATION Police Chief Garry Anderson expressed appreciation to Fred Meyer Stores, Inc. Police: Fred Meyer providing space for a Police Department sub -station free of charge for nine Recognition for Housing Sub- years at the Fred Meyer shopping center on Rainier Ave. S. He noted the Station relocation of the police sub -station from this space to the City Center Parking garage in downtown Renton. Chief Anderson presented Rick Nestegard, Store Director, with a plaque and a certificate of appreciation, and pointed out that Fred Meyer also contributes to community events such as the Special Olympics and the Return to Renton Car Show. 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: • A fireworks ban is in effect within the Renton City limits and both the Police and Fire Departments will actively enforce this ban. • The Henry Moses Aquatic Center will open for the weekend, June 18th and 19th, and then re -open daily for the season on June 22nd through September 5th. 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 June 6, 2005. Council concur. June 6, 2005 Plat: Maureen Highlands Development Services Division recommended approval, with conditions, of the Division III, Rosario Ave NE, Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat; 19 single-family lots on 4.6 acres FP-05-049 located east of Rosario Ave. NE and north of NE 4th St. (FP-05-049). Council concur. (See page 215 for resolution.) Planning: Multi -Family Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Housing Property Tax recommended approval to modify the existing designated residential targeted Exemption Modifications areas for the multi -family housing property tax exemption and to improve the clarity or intent of the project eligibility requirements. Refer to Planning and Development Committee; set public hearing on 6/27/2005. Comprehensive Plan: 2005 Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Department Amendments submitted proposed 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendments. Refer to Planning and Development Committee and Planning Commission. June 13, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 215 Human Resources: 2005 Human Resources and Risk Management Department recommended approval Group Health Cooperative of the 2005 Group Health Cooperative medical coverage contracts for LEOFF I Medical Coverage Contracts Employees, LEOFF I Retirees, and all other active employees. Refer to Finance Committee. Utility: Emergency Power Utility Systems Division recommended approval of an agreement in the amount Generation Facilities Design, of $118,664 with RH2 Engineering, Inc. to design the emergency power RH2 Engineering generation facilities for the City of Renton power system. Council concur. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Added Letters were entered into the record from 3rd grade students (Carolyn Stephens CORRESPONDENCE and Cindy Pickens, Instructors) at Renton Park Elementary School, 16828 Citizen Comment: Renton Park 128th Ave. SE, Renton, 98058, expressing their opinions regarding the issue of Elementary - Grocery Cart abandoned shopping carts. Abandonment UNFINISHED BUSINESS Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report Community Services recommending concurrence in the Mayor's appointment of Heidi Beckley to the Committee Library Board for a five-year term expiring 6/1/2010. MOVED BY NELSON, Appointment: Library Board SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilwomen Nelson introduced Ms. Beckley who expressed appreciation for the opportunity to serve the City. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 237891 - 238476 and three wire transfers totaling $3,465,339.95; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 57502 - 57757, one wire transfer, and 575 direct deposits totaling $1,899,288.87. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Budget: 2005 Amendment Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending (Carry Forward & Additional concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve carry forward requests and Appropriations) additional appropriations in various funds totaling $24,654,915 for the purpose of meeting 2004 obligations in 2005. These appropriation adjustments will result in the increase of the 2005 Budget from $152,731,500 to $177,386,415. Funding for a comprehensive utility rate study is included in this budget adjustment. The Administration will review the scope of work for the rate study with the City Council prior to its initiation. The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See page 216 for ordinance.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following resolution was presented for reading and adoption: ORDINANCES Resolution #3759 A resolution was read approving the Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat; Plat: Maureen Highlands approximately 4.6 acres located east of Rosario Ave. NE and north of NE 4th Division III, Rosario Ave NE, St. (FP-05-049). MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, FP-05-049 COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for first reading and referred to the Council meeting of 6/20/2005 for second and final reading: June 13, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 216 Budget: 2005 Amendment An ordinance was read amending Ordinance 5110 relating to the City of Renton (Carry Forward & Additional 2005 Budget, increasing the 2005 Budget to $177,386,415. MOVED BY Appropriations) LAW, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 6/20/2005. CARRIED. The following ordinance was presented for second and final reading and adoption: Ordinance #5145 An ordinance was read adding a new subsection to Section 5-1-2.F of Chapter Development Services: 1, Fee Schedule, of Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) and a new Grocery Cart Abandonment Chapter 6-27, Shopping Cart Regulation, to Title VI (Police Regulations) of City Code relating to abandoned shopping carts. MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilwomen Palmer expressed her appreciation to the sponsors of the School District: Fundraiser for 'Renton Plays On, Hair -Cut -a -Thou" event held June 12th at the Piazza. She Musical Instruments noted that proceeds from the event will be used by the Renton School District to purchase musical instruments. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 7:521lXi.��``p.m. ",ram / 1j (,�Jan-) Bonnie I. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann June 13, 2005 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 13, 2005 COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MON., 6/20 CANCELLED (Briere) COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE (Persson) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (Clawson) PUBLIC SAFETY MON., 6/20 Race Attendance Ordinance (Law) 7:00 p.m. TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) (Palmer) UTILITIES (Corman) NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers unless otherwise noted. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM 13 DATE: June, 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 A fireworks ban is in effect within the Renton city limits and both the Police and Fire Departments will actively enforce this ban. Violators can be fined between $100 and $500. To report fireworks violations, call 911. For more details about the fireworks ban, contact the Fire Department at 425- 430-7000. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • A special new event called X-Treme Games will premiere Friday, June 17d', from 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at Liberty Park with rock wall climbing, obstacle courses, and daring events for ages eight and up. The event is co -sponsored by the Renton Recreation Division, Renton Fire Department, U.S. Army, and the Washington State Patrol. Pepsi and Verizon will provide refreshments and prizes. Register at the Community Center for $6 per person and call 425430-6700 for more information. • The Henry Moses Aquatic Center will open for the weekend, Saturday, June 18`", and Sunday, June 19d', and then re -open daily for the season on Wednesday, June 22nd, through Monday, September 5d'. As part of the opening on Saturday, at noon the Renton Municipal Arts Commission will unveil a plaque honoring the Center's namesake, Henry Moses. New features for 2005 include a slide for smaller children, a new spray feature at the lazy river, a separate pass card gate for season pass holders, group rates, a second canopy for rentals, non -slip surfaces in the locker rooms, improved signage, and pizza on the Shark Bite Caf6 menu. PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT Winsper Homeowners Association took advantage of our Clean Sweep Neighborhood Community Clean Up Program this past weekend by filling one 30-yard container with yard waste and one 30- yard container with general refuse. This coming weekend the Earlington and Kennydale neighborhoods will be participating in this Community Clean Up Program. We are in the homestretch of planning for the June 25d' curbside collection, our last and final project of this year's Clean Sweep Renton Project. The brochure has been mailed to all single-family solid waste customers. In addition, this program has been promoted through a variety of neighborhood newsletters. We are anticipating full participation! It. CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI#: Submitting Data: Planning/Building /Public Works For Agenda of. June 13, 2005 Dept/Div/Board.. Development Services Division Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Juliana Fries x:7278 Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. Subject: MAUREEN HIGHLANDS DIVISION III FINAL Correspondence.. PLAT Ordinance ............. X File No. LUA 05-049, FP (LUA 01-079, PP) Resolution............ 4.6 acres located East of Rosario Ave NE & North of Old Business........ NE 41h Street. New Business....... Exhibits: 1. Resolution and legal description Study Sessions...... 2. Staff report and recommendation Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept......... X Council concur Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: N/A Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The recommendation for approval of the referenced final plat is submitted for Council action. Division III of the plat divides 4.6 acres into 19 single-family residential lots. The construction of the utilities and street improvements to serve the lots is completed. All plat improvements are constricted to the satisfaction of City staff. All conditions placed on the preliminary plat by City Council will be met prior to recording of the plat. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat, LUA 05-049, FP, with the following condition and adopt the resolution. 1. All mitigation fees shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (MAUREEN HIGHLANDS DIVISION III; FILE NO. LUA-05-049,FP). 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 L The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION H. 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 property, consisting of approximately 4.6 acres, is located east of Rosario Avenue NE and north of NE 4 Street) 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 June 1, 2005. PASSED BY TBE CITY COUNCIL, this day of 72005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of 2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 1116:6/06/05:ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2 CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE, WA 98007 CORE Project No: 03024 LEGAL DESCRIPTION — Maureen Highlands Div.11l Parcel A of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment LUA-05-028-LLA, according to the lot line adjustment thereof recorded May 3, 2005 under King county recording No. 20050503900029. CADocuments and Settings\jsitthideALocal Settings\Temp\MXLibDir\03024L11 Div IIILEGAL.doc RENTON HIGHLANDS y - 1 0SITE NE < < m Y NE 4th St SE 128 ST \ j < L < rn fob j rn E 144#h St VICINITY MAP N N.T.S. MAUREEN HIGHLANDS, DIV. III PAGE FINAL PLAT 10F 1 VICINITY MAP 14711 NI. 29+h Place, #101 Beffevue, Warhingtan 98007 425.885,7877 Fax 425.885.7963 /DESIGN ENGINEERING • PLANNING • SURVEYING JE 4c> F3 " C] _ C.13 (D] 2.4 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION BUILDING/PLANNING/PUBLIC WORKS CITY OF RENTON STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS APPLICANT: Harbour Homes, Inc. Maureen Highlands Division III Final Plat. File: LUA 05-049FP LOCATION: East of Rosario Ave NE & North of NE 41' Street. Section 11, Twp. 23 N., Rng 5 E. SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Final Plat for 19 single-family residential lots with water, sanitary sewer, storm, street and lighting. RECOMMENDATION: Approve With Conditions FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record documents in this matter, staff now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Harbour Homes, Inc., filed a request for approval of Division III (Phase 5), a 19-lot Final Plat. 2. 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. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official, issued a Determination on Non -Significance -Mitigated on July 31, 2001 for the subject proposal. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at East of Rosario Ave NE & North Side of NE 4t' Street. The new plat is located in Section 11, Twp. 23 N., Rng 5 E. 6. The subject site is a 4.6-acre parcel. 7. The Preliminary Plat (LUA-01-079) was approved by the City of Renton Council on November 5°i 2001. 8. The site is zoned Residential 5 DU/AC (R-5). 9. The Final Plat complies with both the Zoning Code and the Comprehensive Plan. 10. All plat improvements are constructed to the satisfaction of City staff. 11. The Preliminary Plat was subject to a number of conditions as a result of both environmental review and plat review. The applicant complied with the conditions imposed by the ERC: ■ The construction drawings comply with the recommendations made by the geotechnical engineering report, by GeoEngineers, in their geotechnical study. ■ The Wetland Mitigation Plan has been adopted. Wetlands mitigation has been provided. ■ The project complied with the 1998 King County Surface Water Design Manual, and provided flow control Level 2 — for detention. ■ The Transportation Fee will be paid prior to recording. ■ The Fire Mitigation Fee will be paid prior to recording. ■ The Parks Mitigation Fee will be paid prior to recording. 11. In addition, the applicant has complied with the conditions imposed as a result of Preliminary Plat: ■ Applicant complied with the above ERC conditions. ■ A Substantial Completion of Water Mains and Hydrants letter was received from Water District # 90. ■ The already created Maureen Highlands Homeowners Association will have the referenced maintenance responsibilities. A Second Supplemental Declaration of Maureen Highlands to the Declaration of Protective Covenants, Conditions, Easements and Restrictions of Maureen Highlands declares Division H of Maureen Highlands a member of the Association. The Second Supplemental Declaration was reviewed and approved by Development Services and the City Attorney, and includes the referenced maintenance responsibilities. ■ Payment of Issaquah School District will be required prior to the issuance of any building permit. ■ A new public street connecting to NE 4'h Street has been provided. ■ Certification of minimum water pressure has been provided. ■ An Utility and Access easement along the eastern boundary of the subject site has been granted to the Maureen Highlands plat CONCLUSIONS 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 fees shall be paid prior to the recording of the plat. SUBMITTED THIS Is'DAY OF DUNE, 2005 JIANAFRI DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION cc: Kayren Kittrick LUA-05-049-FP CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE, WA 98007 CORE Project No: 03024 LEGAL DESCRIPTION — Maureen Highlands Div.11l Parcel A of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment LUA-05-028-LLA, according to the lot line adjustment thereof recorded May 3, 2005 under King county recording No. 20050503900029. CADocuments and Settings\jsitthidet\Local Settings\Temp\MXLibDir\03024L11 Div IIILEGAL.doc i m' m EECKS TEN ACRE .RAGA fW11D REBAR W/ / VOL9. PG. 11 / 0. CAP 0.2 S ! D.4 E S TELOT 27 N LBECR'ACRCR A E .RAG VOL 9, P0. 11 yy� �/RuR� ww N. UNE SW. 1/4 SEC, ILL 8M Y,. 4 e 6 a NL 7M CL s 1 1e ie 17 1 — z9 I � I 27 2° N.E. 71N PL E NAUREEN NIONUNDS D V. II VOL 227. vc5 1-5. REC.2244001491 yy`s11 0 I 21 F 23 6 11 MAUREEN HIGHLANDS, DIV. III PAGE FINAL PLAT PLAT PLAN 10F 1 14711 NE 29th Place, #101 C p� Bellevue, Washington 98007 425.885.7877 Fax 425.885.7963 DESIGN ENGINEERING • PLANNING • SURVEYING JOB NO_ 03024 PARal0 _ OTT W REII LLA N0. UlA-OS-On-IU , W. �" 7 1 e 1 e le 10 11 is le 14 VUCT 1 N N.T.S. I r RENT _ ,t O HIGHLANDS i-- -"rG. T . j_. Q I0- NC 7tr- i. < SE NE 4th St i rn Y ran Vie; �fi 1-71 42nd St st VICINITY MAP N N.T.S. MAUREEN HIGHLANDS, DIV. III PAGE FINAL PLAT VICINITY MAP 10171 14711 NE 29t Place, ##101 Bellevue, Washington 98007 � 1nc 425.885.7877 Fax 425.885-7 963 tom►"" DESIGN ENGINEERING • PLANNING - SURVEYING J t:> E3 i`+.r tom► _ C> 3 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 6/13/2005 Dept/Div/Board.. EDNSP Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Mark Santos -Johnson Ext. 6584 Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. X Subject: Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Correspondence.. Program - Designated Residential Targeted Areas Ordinance ............. Modification and Text Amendments Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Ordinance Information........ . Recommended Action: 1) Refer to the Planning & Development Committee. 2) Set a public hearing on 6/27/05 for the proposed modification to the designated residential targeted areas for the multi - tax Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... N/A Transfer/Amendment....... N/A Amount Budgeted....... N/A Revenue Generated......... N/A Total Project Budget N/A City Share Total Project.. N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: In December 2003, the Council established a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi- family housing development in designated residential targeted areas (codified as RMC 4-1-220). SECO Development recently asked the City to extend the multi -family housing property tax exemption (MFHPTE) to the Southport site to enable the company to proceed with building The Carling, a 195- unit multi -family housing project. In order to be eligible for the MFHPTE, the City needs to amend the Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area to include the Commercial Office Residential 3 zone (i.e., the Southport site). In marketing the MFHPTE during the last year -and -a -half, EDNSP staff has identified several minor text amendments to improve the clarity or intent of the project eligibility requirements in RMC 4-1- 220D. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (1) Set a public hearing on 6/27/05 for the proposed modification to the existing designated residential targeted areas for the multi -family housing property tax exemption (MFHPTE) to add the Commercial Office Residential 3 zone to the current Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area; (2) approve the modification to the Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area; and (3) adopt an ordinance to add the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone to the existing Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area and make minor text amendments to improve the clarity or intent of the project eligibility requirements in RMC-4-1-220D. tafgeted area and make minor text amendments to improve the clarity or intent of the project eligibility requirements in RMC-4-1-220D. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 6, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: ,L, Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor l0 FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator` STAFF CONTACT: Mark Santos -Johnson, Economic Development Specialist Ext. 6584 SUBJECT: Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Program — Designated Residential Targeted Areas Modification and Text Amendments ISSUE: Should the City modify the designated residential targeted areas for the multi -family housing property tax exemption (MFHPTE) provided for in RMC 4-1-220 and make minor text amendments to improve the clarity or intent of the current project eligibility requirements? RECOMMENDATION: As required by RCW 84.14.040, set a public hearing for June 27, 2005, to modify the existing designated residential targeted areas for the MFHPTE to add the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone (i.e., the property specifically known as Southport) to the current Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area. Approve the modified Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area and adopt an ordinance to add the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone to the existing Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area and make minor text amendments in the project eligibility requirements in RMC-4-1-220D as identified below. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Overview As authorized by Chapter 84.14 RCW, the City Council adopted ordinance 5061 on December 22, 2003, (codified in RMC 4-1-220) to establish a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi -family housing development in the following three designated residential targeted areas: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV) zone, the Residential Multi -Family Suburban Center (RM-C) zone, or the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone; or June 6, 2005 Page 2 In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi -Family Urban Center (RM- U) zone, Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM-T) zone, or • In the Urban Center North District 1 (UC-NI) zone. In addition to being located in one of the designated residential targeted areas noted above, eligible multi -family housing projects must, for example, be newly constructed and have a minimum of 30 attached dwelling units if located in the CD, or UC-N1 zones or a minimum of 10 attached dwelling units if located in one of the other zones noted above. As outlined in Chapter 84.14 RCW, the provision allows the value of qualified new housing construction to be exempt from ad valorem property taxation for 10 successive years after completion of the project. However, the exemption does not include the value of the land, existing improvements or non -housing -related improvements (e.g., commercial space). The multi -family property tax exemption is in addition to any other tax credits, grants or incentives provided by law for the multi -family housing. Interest in the Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption EDNSP has marketed the MFHPTE to help encourage new residential construction in the residential targeted areas. The City recently received and approved MFHPTE applications for the Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, a 155-unit multi -family retirement residence located at 104 Burnett Avenue S and the Parkside at 95 Burnett, a 106-unit multi -family housing project located at 77 and 95 Burnett Avenue S. EDNSP currently anticipates at least one additional MFHPTE application this year (i.e., Harrington Square, a proposed 210 to 215-unit multi -family housing facility to be located at 950 Harrington Avenue NE in the Renton Highlands). Proposed Modification to Designated Residential Targeted Areas The current MFHPTE residential targeted areas include the Urban Center North District 1 (UC- N1) zone in north Renton, but not the nearby Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone (i.e., the Southport project). SECO Development, the Southport developer, completed The Bristol at Southport in 2001. The Bristol is a 188-unit multi -family housing project and the first phase of the Southport development. The City's MFHPTE was not established until after The Bristol was completed and the City's property tax exemption does not apply to existing structures. Because of the high office vacancy rate in the region, SECO Development has been unable to proceed with the proposed 750,000 sf of office space, or the adjacent boutique hotel, planned for Southport. Recently, SECO Development advised EDNSP that the company will also be unable to proceed in the near future with the second phase of the project's multi -family housing development, The Carling (a 195-unit multi -family housing project), unless the project receives the MFHPTE. Since The Carling has not yet applied for a building permit from the City, the project could be eligible for the MFHPTE if the City modifies the designated residential targeted areas. IssuePaper-Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Southport 6-6-05.doc June 6, 2005 Page 3 As required by RCW 84.14.040, EDNSP is requesting that the Council set a public hearing for June 27, 2005, to modify the existing designated residential targeted areas for the MFHPTE to add the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone to the current Urban Center North District 1 designated residential targeted area. Please see Attachment 1 for a map of the proposed modified designated Residential Targeted Areas for the Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption. As currently required in RMC 4-1-220 for projects located in the Center Downtown (CD), Urban Center North District 1 (UC-NI) or Center Village (CV) zones, EDNSP recommends that MFHPTE projects in the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR3) zone consist of a minimum total of 30 new dwelling units of multi -family housing; (ii) be located in a new mixed -use development, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator; and (iii) comply with the design standards and guidelines in RMC 4-3-100 for District "C." Potential Property Tax Savings for The Carling at Southport The multi -family property tax exemption applies to all levels of the ad valorem property tax, including the local jurisdiction, county, state, and all local taxing districts. For projects in Renton, this amounts to a total of $11.86676 per $1,000 of assessed value for 2005. The value of the property tax exemption will of course be determined by the nature, quality, and cost of the multi -family housing (e.g., size, type, parking, and amenities). For The Carling, the projected potential MFHPTE would equal approximately $282,154 per year, or $2,821,545 over 10 years (based on the current ad valorem property tax rate) and an estimated assessed value for improvements of 75 % of the projected construction cost. This equates to a potential property tax savings of approximately $1,447 per year per housing unit ($14,469 per housing unit for the 10- year period) for the project. The City of Renton's portion of the above estimated potential property tax savings would equal approximately $76,729 per year ($767,289 for the 10-year period) for the 195-unit multi -family housing project. Although the City would receive additional property tax revenue from the commercial portion of The Carling project, plus potential additional property tax revenue from the anticipated increased assessed values for the land, the City would not receive property tax revenue for the residential improvements until after the 10-year property tax exemption period if the project was eligible for the MFHPTE. (Please see Attachment 2, The Carling - Projected Property Tax Calculation, for a summary of the potential MFHPTE for The Carling, plus a breakdown of the local ad valorem property tax rate and how the tax rates apply to the various taxing entities.) Proposed Text Amendments to Project Eligibility Requirements in RMC 4-1-220D In marketing the MFHPTE program, EDNSP staff identified two project eligibility items in RMC 4-1-220 where the current text or format created unintended provisions. Although neither provision has applied to any known projects interested in using the MFHPTE at this time, EDNSP IssuePaper-Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Southport 6-6-05.doc June 6, 2005 Page 4 staff proposes changing the following two items in the Project Eligibility section, RMC 4-1-220D, to clarify the City's intent: • (i) The legal lot definition applies to projects located in any residential targeted area; and (ii) In the case of an existing occupied residential structure that is proposed for demolition and redevelopment as new multi -family housing, the project must provide the greater of the existing number of dwelling units (if applicable) plus four dwelling units or the number of dwelling units otherwise provided for in RMC 4-1-220D2 (i.e., 10 or 30 dwelling units, depending upon where the property is located). EDNSP staff also proposes naming each of the three designated residential targeted areas to assist in marketing the MFHPTE. The proposed names are "Downtown," "Highlands," and "South Lake Washington" as noted on the map included as Attachment 1. Please refer to Attachment 3 for a redline version of the proposed text amendments regarding the project eligibility requirements in RMC 4-1-220D (excluding, for the purpose of illustration, the proposed changes related to the modified Urban Center North District 1 residential targeted area described above). Please refer to Attachment 4 for a draft Ordinance with redline all of the current proposed changes to RMC 4-1-220. For Attachments 3 and 4, only the text that is marked by an underline or strikethrough is different from the current code. CONCLUSION: The multi -family property tax exemption provided for in 84.14 RCW has been utilized by a number of local jurisdictions to help spur development in urban neighborhoods with insufficient housing opportunities. Although the tax exemption by itself is not enough to create developments, it is an added financial incentive for developers to create quality multi -family housing in targeted areas in our community. Renton's MFHPTE has started to generate additional interest in development of desired multi- family housing in residential targeted neighborhoods. In order to make the proposed changes outlined above, the City needs to hold a public hearing to consider the modified residential targeted area for eligible projects, approve the modified designated residential targeted area, and adopt an ordinance that modifies RMC 4-1-220 to modify the residential targeted area and make the minor text amendments described above. Attachments: Proposed Modified Residential Targeted Areas for Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption map Potential Projected Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption for the Carling Proposed Text Amendments to Project Eligibility Requirements in RMC 4-1-220D Draft Ordinance cc: Jay Covington, CAO Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Michael Wilson, Interim FIS Administrator Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Neil Watts, Development Services Director IssuePaper-Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Southport 6-6-05.doc CT Attachment 2 Potential Projected Multi -Family Housing Property Tax Exemption for the Carling (a.k.a. Southport Phase II Multi -Family Development)* Number of Housing Units Projected Cost of Construction Estimated Assessed Value for Land after Construction Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements after Construction Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements after Construction . Residential Portion Estimated Assessed Value for Improvements after Construction - Retail/Commercial Portion Breakdown of Projected Property Tax (Based on 2005 Property Tax Rates) City of Renton - General Levy City of Renton - Special Levy Total City of Renton property tax King County Port of Seattle Hospital District #1 Renton School District #403 State of Washington School Fund Emergency Medical Service Sub -total other property tax Total Property Tax Estimated Annual Property Tax per Housing Unit Annual Estimated Property Tax Savings for Residential Improvements Ten Year Estimated Property Tax Savings for Residential Improvements City of Renton Portion of Annual Estimated Property Tax Savings for Residential Improvements City of Renton Portion of Ten Year Estimated Property Tax Savings for Residential Improvements 195 $32,774,468 (Reflects current value, but subject to increase based on $1,968,700 increased improvements to site) $24,580,851 (Estimated by City at 75% of projected construction costs) $23,776,875 $803,976 2005 Rate Estimated Estimated Estimated Property Total Estimated per $1,000 of Property Property Tax for Tax for Property Tax Assessed Tax for Residential Retail/Commercial (Land & Value Land Improvements Improvements Improvements) $3.14843 $6,198 $74,860 $2,531 $83,589 $0.07861 $155 $1,869 $63 $2,087 $3.22704 $6,353 $76,729 $2,594 $85,676 $1.38229 $2,721 $32,867 $1,111 $36,699 $0.25321 $498 $6,021 $204 $6,723 $0.09039 $178 $2,149 $73 $2,400 $3.99250 $7,860 $94,929 $3,210 $105,999 $2.68951 $5,295 $63,948 $2,162 $71,405 $0.23182 $456 $5,512 $186 $6,155 $8.63972 $17,009 $205,426 $6,946 $229,381 $11.86676 $23,362 $282,154 $9,541 $315,057 $120 $1,447 N/A $1,567 $282,154 $2,821,545 $76,729 $767,289 * Based on 2005 Property Tax Rates, but subject to change in the future based on new tax rates and/or changes in the project's assessed value. Attachment 3 Proposed Text Amendments to Project Eligibility Requirements in RMC 4-1-220D D. PROJECT ELIGIBILITY: To qualify for exemption from property taxation under this Section, the project must satisfy all of the following requirements: 1. Location: The property must be located in one of the fellowinoesignated "residential targeted areas"_ listed below in Dla. Dlb or Dlc of this Section. If a part of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area, then the entire lot shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. a. Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV) zone, the Residential Multi -Family Suburban Center (RM-C) zone, or the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone; or b. In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi -Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM-T) zone, or c. In the Urban Center North District 1 (UC-NI) zone or the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone. TIFF-0—ppinartr-of any legal lot i within a residential targeted afea, the„ 1ot shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. 4. Exception for Existing Residential Structure: In the case of an existing occupied residential structure that is proposed for demolition and redevelopment as new multi -family housing, the project must provide as a minimum number of dwelling units in the new multi- family housing project, the greater of: a. replace the existing number of dwelling units and, unless the existing residential rental structure was vacant for twelve (12) months or more prior to demolition, provide for a minimum of four (4) additional dwelling units in the new multi -family housing project; or b. provide the number of dwelling units otherwise required in RMC 4- l-220D2.An existing residential rental structure that has b@en vaea.w. for twelve (17) months or more prior- to demolition Ton not have to provide additional dwelling unite lssuePaper-Multi-Family Housing Property Tax Exemption Southport 6-6-05.doc Attachment 4 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 4-1-220, PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MULTI -FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS, OF CHAPTER 1, ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT, OF TITLE IV (DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON" BY MODIFYING THE DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS AND OTHER PROJECT ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS. WHEREAS, in 1995, the Washington State Legislature adopted Chapter 84.14 RCW, to encourage increased residential opportunities in cities required to plan under the Growth Management Act, by providing for special property tax valuations for eligible multi -family housing in targeted urban areas; and WHEREAS, Chapter 84.14 RCW, as amended, further authorized cities with a population of at least thirty thousand (30,000) to adopt procedures to implement the special property tax valuations; and WHEREAS, on December 15, 2003, the Renton City Council held a public hearing to receive public comments regarding proposed designated "residential targeted areas" in the Center Downtown, Urban Center North and Center Village Comprehensive Plan designations for the purpose of allowing a limited property tax exemption for qualifying multi -family housing, pursuant to RCW 84.14.040(2); and WHEREAS, on December 22, 2003, the Renton City Council adopted ordinance 5061 (codified in RMC 4-1-220) to establish a property tax exemption incentive to encourage multi- family housing development in designated residential targeted areas; and 1 ORDINANCE NO. WHEREAS, the City desires to modify the Urban Center North District 1 designated "residential targeted area" to help stimulate new construction of multi -family housing in the adjacent Commercial Office Residential 3 zone, thereby reducing development pressures on single-family residential neighborhoods and increasing housing opportunities; and WHEREAS, on June 27, 2005, the Renton City Council held a public hearing to receive public comments regarding the proposed modification to the Urban Center North District 1 designated "residential targeted area" to add the adjacent Commercial Office Residential 3 zone; and WHEREAS, the Renton City Council desires to modify the project eligibility requirements to improve clarity and intent; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Subsection 4-1-220D, Project Eligibility, of Section 4-1-220, Property Tax Exemption for Multi -Family Housing in Residential Targeted Areas, of Chapter 1, Administration and Enforcement, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended to read as follows: To qualify for exemption from property taxation under this Section, the project must satisfy all of the following requirements: 1. Location: The property must be located in one of the €ollewipigdesignated "residential targeted areas" listed below in Dla Dlb or Dlc of this Section. -.- If a part of any legal lot is within a residential targeted area, then the entire lot shall be deemed to lie within the residential targeted area. 4 ORDINANCE NO. a. Highlands: Within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in one of the following: the Center Village (CV) zone, the Residential Multi -Family (RM-F) zone, or the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R- 10) zone; or b. Downtown: In the Center Downtown (CD) zone, Residential Multi - Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone, or Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM-T) zone:: or c. South Lake Washington: In the Urban Center North District 1 (UC- N1) zone or Commercial Office Residential (COR 3) zone. 2. Size and Structure: a. If the project is located in the Residential Multi -Family Urban Center (RM-U) zone or Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM-T) zone or within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in either the Residential Multi -Family (RM-F) zone or the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R-10) zone, the project must (i) consist of a minimum total of ten (10) new dwelling units of multi -family housing, and (ii) be located within a new residential structure(s) or a new mixed -use development as allowed by the RMC for the specific zone. At least fifty (50) percent of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent residential occupancy. 3 ORDINANCE NO. b. If the project is located in the Center Downtown (CD) zone, or -Urban Center North District 1 (UC-NI) zone, or Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone, or within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation and in the Center Village (CV) zone, the project must (i) consist of a minimum total of thirty (30) new dwelling units of multi- family housing and (ii) be located in a new mixed -use development, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. If the Administrator waives the mixed -use development requirement, the multi -family housing must be located in a new residential structure(s). At least fifty (50) percent of the space within the project shall be intended for permanent residential occupancy. 3. Special Design Regulations for Projects Located in the Center Village Comprehensive Plan Designation or the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) 'Lone: a. If the project is located in the Center Village (CV) zone or Residential Multi -Family (RM-F) zone within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation or in the Commercial Office Residential 3 (COR 3) zone, the project must also comply with the design standards and guidelines in RMC 4-3-100 for District `C', even though the project is not located in the Urban Center North Comprehensive Plan designation, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. In ORDINANCE NO. b. If the project is located in the Residential 10 dwelling units/acre (R- 10) zone within the Center Village Comprehensive Plan designation, the project must also comply with the design standards and guidelines in RMC 4-3-100 for District `B', even though the project is not located in the Residential Multi -Family Traditional (RM-T) zone, unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. If the project is located in the Center Village Residential Bonus District described in RMC 4-3-095, the project must also comply with the provisions therein. 4. Exception for Existing Residential Structure: In the case of an existing occupied residential structure that is proposed for demolition and redevelopment as new multi -family housing, the project must provide as a minimum number of dwelling units in the new multi -family housing Project. the greater of: a. replace the existing number of dwelling units and, unless the existing residential rental structure was vacant for twelve (12) months or more prior to demolition, provide for a minimum of four (4) additional dwelling units in the new multi -family housing project; or b provide the number of dwelling units otherwise required in RMC 4- 1-220D2 ^ a t t, t that h � nt -TiTf'Z7CTTC'1'Tl�i IRGTRT[iiTGTITR'["'T47"C[GTRZ'G-C1TCT�T� � fof twelve (12) months, F to demolition does not have to pfovide additional a 5. Completion Deadline: The project must be completed within three (3) years from the date of approval of the contract by the City Council as 5 ORDINANCE NO. provided in RMC 4-1-220F2 or by any extended deadline granted by the Administrator as provided in RMC 4-1-220I. SECTION II. Effective Date. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk day of , 2005. Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 0 u r l� L 6 N �■ h- fi IN, a1 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board. Staff Contact Economic Development Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Rebecca Lind For Agenda of: June 13, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Subject: Public Hearing.. 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Concurrent I Correspondence.. Rezones Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Background memos for applications 2005-M-1, 2005- Information......... M-2, 2005-M-5, 2005-M-6, 2005-M-7, 2005-M-9, 2005-T-1 and 2005-T-2 Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to the Planning and Development Committee and Legal Dept......... the Planning Commission Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City received one private comprehensive plan amendment request and eleven city -initiated requests, including eight map amendments and three text amendments for the 2005 review cycle. The private request is from Mr. O,J. Harper, File # LUA 04-146. Mr. Harper requested the rezone of an 11,000 square foot parcel, located on the south side of Tobin Street in the R-8 zone, to Commercial Arterial. The City initiated requests include the following: File #05-M-1 Refine Residential Low Density designation mapping within the Comprehensive Plan and citywide zoning. This amendment looks at the mapping criteria in the Comprehensive Plan Residential Low Density land use designation to determine whether all RC, R-1 and R-4 zoned areas meet policy criteria for mapping these low -density zones. Several areas in the Residential Single Family land use designation are also evaluated. These areas currently either have R-8 zoning or potential R-8 zoning (due to locations in the PAA that are not yet zoned). Residential Single Family designated areas included in the study are: property along I-405 adjacent to Lincoln Place and Jones Road in North Kennydale, environmentally constrained parcels along the Valley Freeway adjacent to Talbot Road, land in the Anthone annexation area adjacent to Talbot Rd., and portions of Fairwood/Cascade, Maplewood Addition, and Maplewood Glen. These areas are evaluated to determine whether any areas might be ate for Residential Low Density with eventual pre -zoning to either R-4 or R-I/Urban 2005CPAagendabilft File #05-M-2 Amend the Potential Annexation Area to add land between Renton and Bellevue in unincorporated King County to the Renton PAA and evaluate an appropriate land use designation. Residential Single Family and Residential Low Density designations will be evaluated. This is a small area at the north end of Ripley Lane that was never designated in any city's PAA. File # 05-M-3 Evaluate potential boundaries and land use designations for Renton's Potential Annexation Area to determine if existing boundaries and land use designations are appropriate or whether boundaries should be altered based on new data from several governance studies now in process. File #05-M-4 Land use in the Potential Annexation Area was combined with #-2005-M-3. File #05-M-5 Amend the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to reflect amendments made by King County during its 2004 Comprehensive Plan update. The amendments made in King County added a six -acre parcel, located at SE 184`h St., and developed with the Renton Christian Center, to the Urban Growth Area. Renton will need to determine whether to add this area to its PAA and which land use designation should be applied to the area. The Residential Single Family and Residential Low Density designations will be evaluated for adoption in the Renton Comprehensive Plan. File # 05-M-6 Review land use designations in the Tobin neighborhood south of the airport to improve consistency with the Airport Compatible Land Use Plan. Residential Single Family, Urban Center - Downtown, and Commercial Arterial land use designations will be evaluated. (This application is combined with the private request from Mr. O.J. Harper, File # LUA 04-146.) Mr. Harper requested a rezone of an 11,000 square foot parcel, located on the south side of Tobin Street in the R-8 zone, to Commercial Arterial. File #05-M-7 Redesignate the Southport site from the Commercial Office Residential land use designation to Urban Center -North designation. This amendment evaluates whether to amend the Urban Center boundary to include the Southport site. File #05-M-8 Anthone annexation area land use was combined with #05-M-1. File #2005 M-9 Redesignate a Washington Department of Transportation remnant adjacent to I-405 from Commercial Office Residential land use designation to Residential Low Density land use designation. This application is pending from 2002-2003. File #2005 T-1 Review of text for the Comprehensive Plan introduction. File #2005-T-2 Review text in the Utilities Element pertaining to private utility purveyors. File #2005 T-3 Review housekeeping amendments to check and correct names of agencies and programs and correct glossary definitions. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Refer the 2005 Comprehensive Plan amendments to the Planning and Development Committee and the Planning Commission 2005CPAaoendabillbh DATE: CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM June 2, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Alex Pietsch, Administrator W Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department VIA: ��; Mayor Kathy Keolker Wheeler STAFF CONTACT: Rebecca Lind (ext. 6588) SUBJECT: 2005 Comprehensive Plan Amendments ISSUE: Should the City Council initiate the 2005 annual Comprehensive Plan amendment review process? RECOMMENDATION: Refer the following amendments package to the Planning Commission and the Planning and Development Committee: File #05-M-1 Refine the Residential Low Density designation mapping within the Comprehensive Plan and citywide zoning. This amendment looks at the mapping criteria in the Comprehensive Plan Residential Low Density land use designation to determine whether all RC, R-1 and R-4 zoned areas meet policy criteria for mapping these areas for low -density. Several areas in the Residential Single Family land use designation are also evaluated. File #05-M-2 Amend the Potential Annexation Area to add land between Renton and Bellevue in unincorporated King County to the Renton PAA and evaluate an appropriate land use designation. Residential Single Family and Residential Low Density designations will be evaluated. This is a small area at the north end of Ripley Lane that was never designated in any city's PAA. File # 05-M-3 Evaluate potential boundaries and land use designations for Renton's Potential Annexation Area to determine if existing boundaries and land use designations are appropriate June 6, 2005 Page 2 or whether boundaries should be altered based on new data from several governance studies now in process. File #2005-M-5 Amend the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map to reflect amendments made by King County during its 2004 Comprehensive Plan update. The amendments made in King County added a six -acre parcel, located at SE 184th St., and developed with the Renton Christian Center, to the Urban Growth Area. Renton will need to determine whether to add this area to its PAA and which land use designation should be applied to the area. The Residential Single Family and Residential Low Density designations will be evaluated for adoption in the Renton Comprehensive Plan. File # 05-M-6 Review land use designations in the Tobin neighborhood south of the airport. to improve consistency with the Airport Compatible Land Use Plan. Residential Single Family, Urban Center -Downtown, and Commercial Arterial land use designations will be evaluated. (This application is combined with the private request from Mr. O.J. Harper, File # LUA 04- 146.) Mr. Harper requested a rezone of an 11,000 square foot parcel, located on the south side of Tobin Street in the R-8 zone, to Commercial Arterial. File #05-M-7 Redesignate the Southport site from the Commercial Office Residential land use designation to Urban Center -North designation. This amendment evaluates whether to amend the Urban Center boundary to include the Southport site. File #05-M-8 Anthone annexation area land use was combined with #05-M-1. File #2005 M-9 Redesignate a Washington Department of Transportation remnant adjacent to I-405 from Commercial Office Residential land use designation to Residential Low Density land use designation. This application is pending from 2002-2003. File #2005 T-1 Review text for the Comprehensive Plan introduction. File #2005-T-2 Review text in the Utilities Element pertaining to private utility purveyors. File #2005 T-3 Review housekeeping amendments to check and correct names of agencies and programs and correct glossary definitions. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Growth Management Act limits processing of Comprehensive Plan amendments to an annual review cycle. The Renton Municipal Code requires Planning Commission review of these amendments, and requires a Commission recommendation to the City Council. The review process is beginning this year with compilation of background reports on each to the applications. These reports are attached for your information. Application 2005-M-3 involves changes to the PAA and is filed as a placeholder to allow the City to review PAA boundaries when new data is available from several governance studies now underway for Fairwood/Cascade and the West Hill. 2005 Comp Plan Amendment Issue Paper.doe June 6, 2005 Page 3 King County is currently preparing governance studies for both of these areas. Should the City Council desire to make any amendments in the PAA boundaries upon release and subsequent analysis of the studies, then this application could be considered. The governance studies are expected to be available in mid -summer and at that time additional briefing information will be provided. The public review process will begin at the Planning Commission upon referral of these amendments. Neighborhood meetings with property owners are planned for two issues: 1. Application M-2, Amendment to the Potential Annexation Area to add land between Renton and Bellevue in unincorporated King County to the Renton PAA and evaluate an appropriate land use designation. The meeting is not yet scheduled. 2. Application M-6, Review of land use designations in the Tobin neighborhood south of the airport to improve consistency with the Airport Compatible Land Use Plan. The Tobin neighborhood meeting will occur on June 7tn. The public involvement for other applications will occur at the regular Planning Commission meetings. CONCLUSION: The proposed schedule for review of these applications is for Commission review to occur from June to September. A public hearing is tentatively scheduled for October and the Commission recommendation will to be forwarded to the Planning and Development Committee in late October for Council action by the end of the year. cc: Jay Covington Gregg Zimmerman Neil Watts 2005 Comp Plan Amendment Issue Paper.doe 8-1 AMENDMENT 2005-M-1—LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MAP REVISIONS DESCRIPTION: Low -density residential areas are subject to increased scrutiny upon review by outside authorities under the Growth Management Act. Although never explicitly stated in the Growth Management Act, the minimum urban density of four dwelling units per acre (du/acre) has consistently been held as a standard for compliance with the Act. In proceedings before the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board (CPSGMHB), the Board has noted that it is not necessary for cities to designate all lands within their jurisdictions at a minimum four du/acre. However, those portions of the city zoned at densities less than this standard will be carefully examined and the lower density must be justified. The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan sets aside land for residential low -density use, including lands appropriate for larger lot housing stock at four du/acre and lands inappropriate for urban densities. Lands containing significant sensitive areas or assigned as urban separators are to be zoned at densities below the urban standard. Review of decisions by the CPSGMHB support this approach; the Board consistently upholds the standard that densities less than four du/acre are allowed in order to protect pervasive natural hazards or critical areas large in scope, of high rank order value and complex in structure and function. Cities proposing development areas at densities less than the four du/acre urban standard have been found in non-compliance with the Growth Management Act if they have been unable to meet the sensitive areas standard above. Policy LU-135 of the Comprehensive Plan requires the City to review implementation of its low density zoning to ensure consistency with the Residential Low Density objectives and policies. Such a review consists of an evaluation of all lands currently designated at densities below four du/acre for compliance with urban bright -line standard set by the Hearings Board. It also involves an examination of the consistency of allowed uses and development standards of the implementing zoning with the Comprehensive Plan. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should areas designated in the Comprehensive Plan as Residential Low Density (RLD) be redesignated to ensure compliance with the four du/acre urban bright -line? 2. Should any areas designated in the Comprehensive Plan as Residential Single Family (RSF) be redesignated RLD due to the presence of sensitive areas? H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\2005 map amendmentsTow Density ResidentialTow Density Residential Issue.doc AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions 3. Should the zoning of RLD lands be changed, where appropriate, to either provide additional protection to sensitive areas or to allow for more intense development? 4. Is a Title IV text amendment needed to ensure that the development standards and allowed uses in the zones implementing the RLD designation (RC, R-1, and R-4) are consistent with the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • Recommend that one parcel in the vicinity of the intersection of Puget Drive SE, Edmonds Way SE and Royal Hills Drive SE (inventory area M, below) be redesignated RSF due to a lack of sensitive areas. • Recommend that seven areas (inventory areas E, K, L, P, V, W and X, below) be redesignated RLD to protect sensitive areas near May Creek, the Cedar River, wetlands near 167, the Springbrook watershed, Soos Creek, and the Lake Desire and Shady Lake area. • Recommend that the implementing zoning or prezoning for the areas subject to Comprehensive Plan amendment be changed to ensure consistency with the proposed new designation. • Recommend that R-1 prezoning and zoning be implemented to afford additional sensitive areas protection for May Creek, Springbrook watershed, and the Cedar River Valley in areas already designated RLD (inventory areas E, S, and N, below). • Recommend that R-4 prezoning and zoning be implemented to allow for slightly more intense development where sensitive areas are less pervasive (inventory areas B, F, I, J, and N, below). • Recommend that R-4 prezoning and zoning be implemented in areas of the Cedar River Valley that are already developed at these densities (inventory areas L and K) to protect adjacent sensitive areas from more intense development and redevelopment. • Recommend that changes be made to the uses for the R-1 and RC zones to restrict activities of an urban size, scale, and intensity and allow for greater protection of sensitive areas. Page 2 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions Table of Recommended Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Changes Area Current Zoning Proposed Zoning Current CP Designation Proposed CP Designation B R-1 R-4 RLD RLD E R-8 RC SFR RLD E R-8 R-1 SFR RLD E R4 R-1 RLD RLD F (PAA) R4* RLD RLD I R-1 * R4* RLD RLD J (PAA) R4* RLD RLD K R-8 R-4 SFR RLD L R-8 R4 SFR RLD L AA R4* SFR RLD M RC R-8 RLD SFR N AA R-4* RLD RLD N AA R-1 * RLD RLD P R-8 R-1 SFR RLD S (PAA) R-1 * RLD RLD V (PAA) R4* SFR RLD W (PAA) R4* SFR RLD X AA R4* SFR RLD *Pre -zoning classification for areas in the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) Table of Recommended Use Changes in the R-1 zone Use Current Code Proposed Code Adult Day Care H H Day Care Centers H25 Convalescent Centers H Medical Institutions H Table of Recommended Use Changes in the RC zone Use Current Code Proposed Code Group Homes II for 6 or less P AD Group Homes II for 7 or more P Retirement Residences H Cemetery H Service and social organizations H Bed and Breakfast, professional AD H Adult Day Care II H Day Care Centers H25 Convalescent Centers H Medical Institutions H Blank= not allowed, P=permitted use, AD-- administrative conditional use, H= Hearings Examiner conditional use, #25= A preschool or day care center, when accessory to a public or community facility listed in RMC 4-2-060J, is considered a permitted use Page 3 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions ANALYSIS: In order to comply with Policy LU-135 and ensure that the City conforms to the urban bright - line standard, a full inventory of all lands designated RLD in the Comprehensive Plan is necessary. The test of compliance is whether existing significant environmental constraints justify a residential density of less than four du/acre. Significant environmental constraints occur, as defined in policy LU-135, when: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; 2) Developable areas are separated from one another by pervasive critical areas or occur on isolated portions of the site and access limitations exist; 3) The location of the sensitive area results in a non-contiguous development pattern; 4) The area is a designated urban separator; or S) Application of the Critical Areas Ordinance setbacks/buffers and/or net density definition would create a situation where the allowed density could not be accommodated on the remaining net developable area without modification or variances to other standards. Significant environmental constraints provide justification for lands with a density below the urban bright -line and the Comprehensive Plan provides additional assistance in determining the implementing zoning in RLD areas. Under objective LU-DD, the purpose of the residential low -density designation is to provide for a range of lifestyles, protect critical areas and promote compatible uses, and to provide a transition area to rural designations in King County. Low -density residential designation in the Comprehensive Plan is implemented using three zoning districts: Resource Conservation (RC), Residential One du/acre (R-1) and Residential Four du/acre (R-4). Policy LU-134 stipulates that lands should contain significant environmental constraints in order to justify RC or R-1 zoning. Each area designated RLD has been analyzed using these criteria to determine the appropriate Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. Additionally, lands designated RSF that meet the criteria for RLD designation have been included in the inventory. The complete inventory is shown on figures 1 and 2. Inventory of RLD Lands A. Coulon Park is public open space and is not available for residential development. It also is a location of seismic hazard. B. Property cluster in the vicinity of N 26`h Street, north of Gene Coulon Park, containing very few sensitive areas. Most of the parcels are already subject to development. This area is suitable for development at an urban density. See figure 3. C. Parcel south of NE 20"' Street between Jones and Aberdeen Avenues. This property contains a portion of a mapped wetland and has been in use for many years as a working berry farm. As long as the property is used for agriculture, it should remain zoned RC. At such time that the agriculture use is discontinued a rezone of this parcel would be appropriate. D. Strip of properties in the southeast corner of the intersection of Highways 405 and 900. Steep slopes, erosion hazard, and high landslide hazard on these parcels make them appropriate for the current R-1 zoning. Page 4 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions E. Property cluster in the vicinity of May Creek, along Jones Avenue NE and extending southeast along Honey Creek to the vicinity of NE 171h Place. This is dominated by multiple sensitive areas: high and moderate landslide hazards, seismic hazards, flood hazards along May Creek, steep slopes, and approximately five acres of mapped wetlands. This portion of May Creek is within the Lower Basin sub area in the May Creek Basin Action Plan (adopted April 2001). The Action Plan was developed to control sedimentation and non -point pollution in the May Creek Basin and to protect the recharge of the aquifer supplying drinking water to the City of Renton. May Creek is also a recognized wildlife corridor for salmonids and other species in the Renton Comprehensive Plan. As a result, development should be limited to protect the multiple functions provided in this basin sub area. This includes limiting development on the parcels adjacent to May Creek in the northeastern corner of the cluster with only limited sensitive areas. Additionally, it may be prudent to down zone some of the larger parcels that are currently zoned R-8. The eight parcels zoned R-8 to the north of this cluster along Highway 405 are primarily in public ownership and subject to extensive critical areas. There are also parcels that should be down zoned to provide additional protection near the confluence of Honey Creek and May Creek. See figure 4. F. Group of properties just north of the City limits and South of SE 95`h Way. These properties are designated in the Comprehensive Plan as residential low density. There are no major sensitive areas and the existing development is at approximately three du/acre. Development is appropriate at urban densities and it would be appropriate to pre -zone this area R-4. See figure 5. G. Area of the Stonegate plat in the northeast corner of the city limits and the Urban Growth Boundary. These parcels primarily represent an existing plat developed at a density of two to three dwellings per acre. Rezoning the platted property is a moot issue since the pre- existing development has already determined the housing density. The only critical areas are located on a larger parcel divided by May Creek, which is owned in common by the Stonegate property owners. This area is unlikely to be intensely developed since it is a common space for the plat. Nevertheless, it should remain in R-1 to protection from erosion, sedimentation, and run-off to control flooding and protect wildlife habitat in conjunction with the May Creek Basin Action Plan. H. This area south of May Creek lies Just outside city limits and is a designated urban separator that must remain pre -zoned R-1. This is also a portion of the May Creek Valley sub area in the May Creek Basin Action Plan, which has been targeted for protection from erosion, sedimentation, and run-off to control flooding and protect wildlife habitat. I. Parcels in the vicinity of SE 95`h Way and NE 24th Street containing very limited critical areas. They should be rezoned R-4 to match the adjacent property. See figure 5. J. This cluster represents the large expanse of properties designated residential low density in the Comprehensive Plan that lie east of the city limits and extend to the urban growth boundary, bounded on the South by the Renton -Maple Valley Highway. Few sensitive areas appear on planning maps for this area, much of which is characterized by existing suburban style housing developments. This area is appropriately pre -zoned R-4. See figure 6. K. Property cluster lying south of the Cedar River. Most of the property in this cluster is in public ownership for use for utilities, open space, aquifer protection, a wildlife corridor, and future park development. There is a small cluster of residential development, the fully Page 5 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions developed Maplewood Estates Plat, which is zoned R-8. Multiple sensitive areas characterize this land: aquifer protection zone, coal mine hazards, seismic hazards, erosion hazards, steep slopes, and moderate and very high landslide hazards. The properties already designated RLD should remain RC as currently zoned. The Maplewood Estates area should be redesignated RLD and down zoned to R-4 (which is consistent with the existing density) to prevent additional development in that area. See figure 7. L. Property cluster along the Cedar River and north of the Renton -Maple Valley Highway. Similar to the property above, the parcels on the other side of the Cedar River are also subject to multiple sensitive areas: steep slopes, erosion hazards, moderate and very high landslide hazards, seismic hazards, mapped wetland areas, and flood hazards. The land is primarily set aside for open space on both the publicly owned lands and the privately owned lands (which consist primarily of commonly held tracts owned by the homeowners of adjacent subdivisions). There is also an area of residential development, the fully developed Maplewood Addition plat, which is designate RSF. For the best protection of the critical areas and use of the Cedar River area as a wildlife corridor and for aquifer recharge, the properties designated RLD should remain RC as currently zoned. The Maplewood Addition area should be redesignated RLD and rezoned and prezoned R-4 to prevent additional development in that area upon annexation. Existing development in Maplewood Addition is consistent with the R-4 density standard. See figure 7. M. Triangular shaped parcel in the vicinity of the intersection of Puget Drive SE, Edmonds Way SE and Royal Hills Drive SE. This parcel contains no critical areas and should be rezoned R-8 to match the zoning on two sides. See figure 8. N. Areas designated RLD in the Comprehensive Plan in the area of the Cedar River Valley floor outside city limits south of the Renton -Maple Valley Highway and north of the Fairwood area. Much of this area is subject to erosion hazards, landslide hazards, and steep slopes making it unsuitable for development at urban densities of four du/acre. Additionally, development of the hazard -free portions of this land has already occurred at net densities much greater than the City of Renton would have allowed had the properties been annexed prior to development. The areas characterized by hazards should be pre - zoned R-1 and the rest of the area pre -zoned R-4. See figure 9. O. Parcel south of NW 7`h Street containing high landslide hazard, erosion hazard, and steep slopes. It should remain zoned R-1. P. Property along 167 and running from the 405 interchange south to Valley Medical Center. Similar to the area above, this area shows seismic hazard and an extensive mapped wetland in the R-1 area, as well as the adjacent R-8 area to the south. There are potentially more than 80 acres of wetlands here that should be protected with low -density zoning. All of the parcels zoned R-1 and all of the parcels zoned R-8 that do not contain improvements are owned by the City of Renton. These parcels should all be zoned R-1. The parcels containing improvements are mainly on the edge of the sensitive area and should be zoned R-1 on the eastern portion of each parcel, in conjunction with the mapped wetland boundary. See figure 10. Q. City owned property cluster in the vicinity of Oakesdale Avenue SW. These city -owned properties are part of a wetland mitigation bank created by the City of Renton. Every parcel is between 50%-100% covered in mapped wetlands. The current RC zoning protects this area adequately. Page 6 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions R. Property along 167 and south of the S 43rd Street exit. Examination of this area shows seismic hazard and over 20 acres of mapped wetlands in the R-1 zone and a portion of the adjacent RM-I and R-14 zones. The potential size of the wetland in this area indicates the area should be protected with low -density zoning. The adjacent parcels in the RM-F and R-14 zones have achieved their maximum development potential and do not need to be rezoned to protect the wetland. S. Properties just outside city limits to the South in the Springbrook area that are designated for low -density development in the Comprehensive Plan. In addition to land that should be set aside for drinking water protection a major portion of this area is a designated urban separator and should be pre -zoned R-1 accordingly. The Cleveland property is also planned for future park development. See figure 11. T. Properties owned by the City in the most southern portion of the city limits. This property is part of the Springbrook watershed and is subject to steep slopes, erosion hazards, and high and moderate landslide hazards. It should remain zoned for low -density development. U. Property cluster in the vicinity of SE 17901 Street and Carr Road. This area is characterized by moderate and high landslide hazards, erosion hazards, and steep slopes and should remain zoned R-1. V. Area south and west of City Limits near the Springbrook area. The platted property in this area has been developed at approximately four du/acre and many of the non -platted properties show erosion hazards and steep slopes. Given the proximity to the Springbrook watershed reserve and the existing development pattern, this area should be redesignated RLD and prezoned R-4. See figure 11. W. Large expanse of land south of Petrovitsky Road, east of Renton City limits, north of the PAA boundary, and west of the urban growth boundary (and west of 140a' Avenue SE at SE 184`}' Street). This area contains multiple subdivisions at densities ranging from approximately four to eight du/acre and several areas suitable for additional development or redevelopment. Mapped critical areas exist both in the area adjacent to the Springbrook watershed reserve (erosion and landslide hazards and steep slopes) and in the area adjacent to Soos Creek (erosion, flood, landslide and seismic hazards and wetlands). Redesignating this area RLD, and prezoning as R-4, would provide for lower intensity development in the remaining development area, which would add an additional measure of protection for the Springbrook and Soos Creek areas. See figure 12. X. The Lake Desire and Shady Lake areas. There are a number of critical areas mapped here: erosion hazards, wetlands, flood hazards, landslide hazards, and coal mine hazards. Lot sizes range from plats at approximately eight du/acre to multiple acres. This area should be redesignated LDR, and potential prezoned R-4, to prevent intense development near sensitive areas. See figure 13. Development Standards and Use Review The RLD designation is implemented through the development regulations for the RC, R-1 and R-4 zones. The Comprehensive Plan makes a distinction between R-4 zoning and lower density zoning in the policies under objective LU-DD. R-4 zoning should provide for urban, estate -style and higher income housing on lands without critical areas. Lower density zoning in the RC and R-1 zones should be implemented in areas with a prevalence of significant Page 7 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions environmental constraints. There are no policy criteria for distinguishing between the lowest density zones. The differences in the development standards for the zones are in line with the purposes and policies that direct each zone. Under the standards in Ordinance 5100 and RMC 4-2-110A, the R-4 zone provides for higher income, estate -style development through landscaping standards for new plats, residential density at the four du/acre standard, options for both larger lots and small lot clusters, and setback and yard standards that are larger than higher density single-family areas and smaller than the lower density zones. Development in the RC zone promotes and protects critical areas and agricultural uses through large lot size, very low maximum density, large setbacks, large yard sizes, the absence of landscaping standards, and provisions for agricultural uses. R-1 standards provide an intermediary development standard with urban -style yard and setback standards, like the R-4 zone, but much larger lot sizes and lower densities to provide protection for critical areas and create open space. The development standards appropriately account for the differences between the zones and do not require amendment. Although the development standards are appropriately distinct for each zone, the uses for the zones may require some revision. A typical range of uses for low -density urban development is allowed in the R-4 zone: residential, hobby and accessory uses, schools, utilities, limited services and community facilities and no commercial and industrial uses. The R-1 zone allows a similar range of uses, broadening the mix to include more opportunities for recreation, animal uses, and agriculture. This is appropriate since the purpose of the R-1 zone „ is broader and the lower density allows for greater protection of sensitive areas. However, a few uses that include activities of an urban size, scale, or intensity are better served in a more urban zone and should not be allowed in the R-1 zone. Evaluation of the allowed uses in the RC zone reveals that the intensity of a number of allowed uses may not be compatible with the zone's purpose. Larger, more intense uses should be extremely limited or prohibited as they might affect the quality and functions of adjacent critical areas due to potential increases in traffic, impervious surfaces, light, noise, and other issues. Lower intensity uses closely related to the purpose of the zone should be permitted outright with related uses deemed accessory. Mid -range uses, in terms of size, scale and intensity should be allowed, subject to the review and oversight afforded by either an administrative conditional use permit or a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. Allowing less intense uses provides a variety of options for property owners and limiting more intense uses provides a better opportunity to protect and enhance critical areas. Few, if any, private property owners would be adversely affected by tightening use regulations in the RC zone to more closely match the purpose and intent of the zone. More than 75% of the parcels zoned RC are publicly held and approximately one third of those parcels in private ownership are open spaces held in common as part of an existing plat. The few changes proposed for the R-1 zone only serve to limit uses of an urban scale and intensity. Tightening the regulations in these zones truly sets aside land for resource conservation and for the protection and promotion of valuable resources that affect the quality of life for the City's citizens and businesses. Page 8 of 9 AMENDMENT 2004-M-05— Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. These citywide redesignations meet all of the review criteria for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The recommended changes comply with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The proposed prezones, rezones, and text amendments are concurrent with the Comprehensive Plan. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G, and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and C. At least one of the following circumstances applies i. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or ii. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. The proposed prezones and rezones meet the review criteria for rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to adopt the redesignations and rezones as proposed. Page 9 of 9 Kesiaential Low Density Lands Inventory Figure 3: Area B - Proposed Zoning Changes 0 300 600 G� o� Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning ♦®♦ Alex Piet=-h, Administrator ME R-1 t0 R-4 G. Dr o TOE 28 M i - lU 1 St C- f, ----- -- - --- - - -I t —� -- R- 1 - 3.6t6 c— ._ F - - C_LIT'LU - -- - - 8- RC -- rd S I IS[ RC - - N E RC - I — - - RC OWS T, -�, CP esidential Low Density Lands Inventory igure 4: Area E - Proposed Zoning Changes and Comp Plan Amendment Uti/�Y o Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning a ,. R-8 to RC 0 1 000 2000 ♦ f i� Alex Pictsch, Administrator G. Del Rosario R-4/R-8 to R-1 - -- - -- t�NT<) 28 March 2005 l� RSF to RLD - -- - -- --- - - - -- - -- - s_, ��I�, ;a.';`r �; 1 � � �i,'� 11S IWO I RC C�� 901 R-8(P) residential Low Density Lands Inventory .gure 8: Area M - Zoning Changes and Comp Plan Amendment Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning 0 RC to R-8 J\ Alex Pictsch, Administrator G. Del Rosario ® RLD to RSF A1JTG$ 28 March 2005 R I � 5 � S ' , 01 2s ° • r .�'1�•1t'� �: Lid 3F{, 7� t�� t2 � i�D 1.� IRS A►. �� .� �, 3C+s'A ' r'S �0��1� ✓ 3 x .> -i ' d�,z,'uet�J rrmrb i .vlogo MIN w 11111�113a0��19II �I 1"MIr� i� mpg _ IL IL7 - CA SW 7.7th St �S 116M Cif 0 `6 CA --- — L WA R-10 - SW 41st S ^asidential Low Density Lands Inventory gure 10: Area P - Zoning Changes and Comp Plan Amendment 0 600 1200 Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning [-D R-8 to R-1 y® Alex Pietsch, Administrator L -- — — — J 1� G. Dcl Rosario 2A' RSF to RLD 28 Marcb 2005 Residential Low Density Lands Inventory Figure 11: Area S & V - Proposed Pre -Zoning and Comp Plan Amendment TY o Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning ED R-1 0 500 1000 Alex Pietsck Administrator R-4 G. Del Rosario BAN fo$ 28 March 2005 ® RSF to RLD iiI■ M - tiO�ii . ■� ,r •, it :m■.. ■..-�� ■�� Ali ►.0 .�. i \� ` .'�� r �• 1� 1//+ .�� ■� - uu'��i ,a.ra.:•_ ■:r lY� Y�I�1 �1■ . .,. w�1 ♦ �rrlc�\i ■ �`In�� p �. Y �• 111111 nnrm■■n i � 1 � :�! � w •�� _ Nl . IN, �Wis.!'� .. �Ifi.:�.�:•_�L -iI♦.` � , _-�� .iil ��r . � �_�„hpiiI1.0 :ol ■■ - t..��i� \1�1�� •m��=� '•..: �11=RAMseva-1, �1i a�■llllltll ■ncre■ �..■■ .� � i � � � t � i j•1 11111111/ ariC'11�i +wa T ® rum ��J. III��■■ i1��1 � � � `� r"°� �_ ., j � me logo 2 1- \IIIIIIIhlne.rllrll►� r ' ry/IIIIIf11111f1+1�i■ ► � " � � � _ INr .�� mac• .r • � 1. � � � � � ...�:. IWIII/� e. w�� 'yirY-Yt � � •�.s . r i Vial � �/IAA.maa�t�4�! 4 ■ auuan � ■s . q e . • �� .,+e � ,.� .'fV; ,.:i'"` '■1■tYr�6 �;, ^9°�St �I:�rCc.��_ �'A-�._ 11JL_�,dzMj1-`MQMlMjJ�.�i.0 �inn�.numm �w■ • CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2005 TO: Planning Commission COPY: Rebecca Lind FROM: Elizabeth Higgins (6576) SUBJECT: EXPANSION OF POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA The purpose of this briefing memorandum is to consider the issue of adding two areas to Renton's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) and Land Use Map. These areas are the Ripley Lane neighborhood and an area of Lake Washington shorelands, currently owned by the Department of Natural Resources (DNR). The Land Use Map would be amended to designate the Ripley Lane area Residential Single Family. The DNR land would be designated Commercial / Office/ Residential land use. The Ripley Lane Neighborhood is located in unincorporated King County, along the shore of Lake Washington, south of Southeast 64th Street. The area is bordered on the north by the Factoria Subarea of the City of Bellevue. The Kennydale Neighborhood of Renton is on the south. This area is not in a designated Potential Annexation Area for Renton, Bellevue or Newcastle, but it is an urban area and an unincorporated island. The King County zoning is Residential 6 (single family residential allowing six dwelling units per acre). There are 33 residential lots along Lake Washington fronting Ripley Lane. y Lane Neighborhood Ii:\FI>NSP\PAA\Other Areas\Ripley Lane\Issue Paper 03.docLast printed 04/28/2005 4:28 PM Planning Commission Memorandum April 27, 2005 Page 2 of 4 The total buildable area, which excludes private property below the Ordinary High Water Mark of the Lake, is 166,912 square feet (3.83 acres). There are approximately 2,043 lineal feet of waterfront_ The area includes a Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way that runs parallel to the shore of Lake Washington, between private residential lots and Interstate 405. The BNRR r-o-w is within Renton's jurisdiction and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential 2 Zone (with Port Quendall). The BNRR r-o-w consists of 556,900 square feet in an area about a mile long. Less than half of this is in the unincorporated area and the remainder is within the City of Renton. Burlington Northern Railroad R-O-W Department of Natural Resources Land The DNR areas of potential annexation are the westerly most points of the Barbee Mill Company property on the Port Quendall peninsula. The two areas of DNR land extend beyond the City of Renton corporate limit into the Lake Washington Shorelands, between the inner and outer harbors. This land may have been created by state - approved filling within the Shorelands. The more northerly of the two pieces of land is about 6,000 square feet and the southern piece is about 875 square feet. Department of Natural Resources Land Planning Commission Memorandum April 27, 2005 Page 3 of 4 Residential Capacity If a future annexation of Ripley Lane were to occur, zoning consistent with the Residential Single Family land use designation would be Residential 8 (R-8). The adjacent residential area has this Comprehensive Plan designation and zoning. The urban zoning of R-8 requires a minimum size 5,000 square feet. Only one existing lot is greater than 10,000 square feet (10,710 square feet), therefore residential capacity of the City would be increased by one lot. DNR Land Capacity The DNR land, if annexed into the City, would be part of Commercial / Office / Residential Zone 2 (Port Quendall). As part of a larger project, it could possibly provide a limited amount of additional commercial, office, or residential capacity to the city. Utility Service City of Renton water and wastewater systems have been extended to Renton's north boundary, near the south end of Ripley Lane. The houses along Ripley, however, are provided with water and wastewater service by the City of Bellevue. If annexed into Renton, Bellevue would probably continue providing service to the area. The DNR property would receive utility service from the City of Renton. Access and Addressing -s to Ripley Lane is only through n due to the narrow configuration of etween the Lake and the BNRR at the north end of Ripley Lane. is no through connection to the City levue to the north. is no direct access from Newcastle. ldresses along Ripley Lane are within nton postal area. R.O. W. Washington shoreline Lane street end Planning Commission Memorandum April 27, 2005 Page 4 of 4 Emergency Response Services The King County Sheriff s Department provides police service to the Ripley Lane Neighborhood. The City of Renton would continue to provide service to the area of the DNR land. Renton Fire District 25, working out of Fire Station 12 in the Highlands, provides fire service to Kennydale (DNR land) and Ripley Lane. School District The Renton School District extends to the north and includes the Ripley Lane Neighborhood. RECOMMENDATION: The EDNSP recommendation is to consider adding the Ripley Lane area and the Department of Natural Resources / Shorelands property to the City of Renton Potential Annexation Area and add both to the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. City of Bellevue ----- -------------- --- -- Corporate Limit ----_ _ _ ----_ _ _ - - -_--_ ----- - ---------- - - - - ------------- - r ----- - - - - -- -------- ---- - i r= Ripley Lane -------------- ________________ t - -- - - - - - --- ------ - - - f City of Renton Limit ------ -------- -- - -----_ __- _--_- _ -- _ ---- - CDR Department of Natural Resources Property _ _-_=_ CA _CA _- - - CDR CK 43P CDR - R-8y - - N 40th A CA Proposed Potential -- Annexation Areas _ _ N b $ s� < R 8 Hh CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: April 14, 2005 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rebecca Lmd, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Application #2005-M-5 Amendment to the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and Potential Annexation Area (PAA) to reflect amendments made by King County during its 2004 Comprehensive Plan Update As part of the 2004 King County Plan update the County added the six -acre Renton Christian Center, located at SE 184"' St. to the Renton Potential Annexation Area (PAA), and amended the Urban Growth Boundary to accommodate this change. The City will also be required to amend its Comprehensive Plan in 2005 to reflect this change. The six -acre site is located in the Lake Desire area, and is also included within the proposed Fairwood Incorporation. Property owners requested inclusion in the urban growth boundary to facilitate expansion of the church and school at that location. The map of the affected area is attached to this issue paper as Exhibit 1 This amendment was considered a "technical correction" by King County staff, and was processed in order to allow the existing church and school to upgrade to sewer service and apply for permits to expand the facility. King County staff conducted a public review process and held public hearings on this issue before the County Council. King County staff coordinated with Renton staff in the early review of this application. These amendments were ratified by the Renton City Council as part of their approval of the 2004 amendments to the Countywide Planning Policies. Recommendation Amend the Renton Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary to include this area within the Potential Annexation Area. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\2005 map amendments\PAA and Urban Growth BoundaryWemo Update on KC 2004 Amendments.doc\cor Map Amendment 10 .� -Renton Christian Center 1 AMENDMENT TO THE KING COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN — LAND USE MAP 2 3 4- Amend Map # 14, Section 36, Township 23, Range 5 as follows: . 5 6 Redesignate the following parcels from -Rural -Residential to Urban Medium Density,.4-11 7 units per acre: 8 :9 3623059098 10 8691501050 12 Retain the open space land use designation for the following parcel and include this parcel in 13 the Urban Growth Area: 14 - 15 3623059007 16 17 Effect: This proposed land use am6iidinerit`w6n1d fneliide•tb-e subject properties within the 18 Urban Growth Area CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: April 14, 2005 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Elizabeth Higgins (6576) SUBJECT: TOBIN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONING REVIEW The Tobin Neighborhood is located between the Downtown Core and the Renton Municipal Airport. The Downtown Core is within Renton's designated Urban Center. Airport Way borders the Tobin Neighborhood on the north and South Second Street borders it on the south. It lies between Lake Avenue South on the west and Logan Avenue South on the east. In 2003 and 2004, Renton adopted an Airport Land Use Compatibility Program (ACLUP). In addition to being required by state law, other reasons for airport compatible land use planning include ensuring the economic viability of the Renton Municipal Airport, increasing public safety in the vicinity of the airport, and improving awareness among the general Renton population about aviation operations in the area. As part of the ACLUP, a portion of Renton was designated as being within an "Airport Influence Area (AIA)." The AIA is comprised of six "safety zones" within which certain land uses are more appropriate than others. Those zones most closely associated with airport approach and departures of aircraft are considered to be more sensitive to potential penetration of dedicated airspace than those associated with overflight. Airport lay Over half of the Tobin Neighborhood lies i [CA; f ; is m cA a within Safety Zone One of the Airport 6 CA k - i Influence Area. Although this does not i �I o� t. —1 D s, necessarily indicate a higher risk level, it does a> mean certain uses and structural forms may be -codo CAI \21 _ I inappropriate in this area. New uses that �� 2 _ ZONE 1 3 !� iti •, attract large numbers of people to a single 3 a C D ( i U location, such as a movie theatre, or structures several stories in height, for example, are uses CA and forms that may be inappropriate in Zone S 2nd t. One. Renton High School has the majority of P land within Zone One. ; - ' - cC CD fin_ Sa et), Zones 1 2 and 3 ' S 3rd SC c' The High School, established at this location in 1929, predates the development of the Airport. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\2005 map amendments\Tobin Neighborhood Rezone\lssue Paper 03.docLast printed 04/14/2005 2:46 PM Planning Commission Memorandum April 14, 2005 Page 2 of 4 The east portion of the High School property, and other parcels in the Tobin Neighborhood already developed as businesses or residences, lie within Safety Zones Two and Three. At issue is whether the regulations of existing zones in the Tobin Neighborhood can be consistent with adopted objectives and policies of the Airport Compatible Land Use Program, taking into consideration the proximity of the Airport, the Airport Influence Area Safety Zones, current uses, and expected future redevelopment. Another issue is whether the uses compatible with the ACLUP objectives and policies can be consistent with those of the Urban Center, which borders the High School property on the east and includes both sides of Logan Avenue South. During the Comprehensive Plan update process, the City Council directed staff to evaluate uses near the Airport that would keep properties on the tax rolls, contribute to the Urban Center, and still comply with Airport compatibility requirements. Prior to adoption of the ACLUP, the Renton Municipal Code had regulations in place for limiting potential obstructions of airspace in the vicinity of the airport. The Renton Airport is one of few in the region that has a high rating for few obstructions. These regulations, however, needed to be updated to contemporary standards. The adopted Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77, "Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace," combined with the designation of the Safety Zones, achieves the goal of improving the regulation of potential obstructions. The height of a building relates to airspace protection and is regulated through the Part 77 standards. Regulations adopted in 2003 and 2004 extended the airport related restrictions to land use, in addition to height standards. Therefore, as part of the continuing process to ensure land use compatibility with aviation operations in the City of Renton and Urban Center objectives, current zoning in the Tobin Neighborhood will be analyzed for consistency with the ACLUP. It is possible that the analysis of the zoning will lead to the need to amend the Comprehensive Plan. The existing Comprehensive Plan designations for the Tobin Neighborhood are: Commercial Corridor (CC) Urban Center — Downtown (UC-D) Residential Single Family (RSF) Safety Zone One, Two, and Three have parcels zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). The CA zoning allows several uses that concentrate large numbers of people, such as restaurants and day care centers. A day care center, and other uses that allow concentrations of people who may have limited mobility or other difficulties in movement, are considered to be inappropriate for these Safety Zones. Planning Commission Memorandum April 14, 2005 Page 3 of 4 In addition to the Commercial Arterial (CA) and Center Downtown (CD) zones mentioned above, zoning in the Tobin Neighborhood currently includes Center Downtown — Public Facility (Renton High School) and Residential Single Family, Eight dwelling units to the acre (R-8). Tobin Neighborhood Zoning Airport Way CA 1 ieUln CA- F [ idA CA S; Tot) LS,t; R 8 D � !a GO CA' . A CD(P) - U hs OA cur_ S 2nd St. I S3M, St. c¢ c'3 � Although single-family residential use is generally not considered compatible with airports, in urban areas where residential use at higher densities is expected, low density residential may be a preferred alternative. Development standards (RMC 4-2-120) allow a wide range of structure heights in the different zones. However, within the Safety Zones these heights cannot be utilized when they conflict with FAR Part 77 standards. Zone CA CD CD P R-8 Maximum Height 35 feet 95 feet 110 feet 2 stories and 30 feet (1) (1) Up to limitations in RMC 4-3-020, "Airport Related height and Use Restrictions." These restrictions are dictated by FAR Part 77 (see above). Residential density, which relates to the issue of the concentration of people within these safety zones, is also regulated by RMC 4-2-120. Zone CA CD CD P R-8 Maximum DensityUnits 20 Dwelling / net acre 100 Dwelling100 Unit /net acre"' Dwellin Units/net acre) 1 Dwelling Units / net acre (1) May be increased up to 150 du/a with administrative approval. Uses allowed in the existing zones (see below) may not be considered compatible with aviation operations. Zone CA CD CD P R-8 Incompatible Eating/Drinking Retirement Parks Residential Uses Allowed establishments residences Schools Adult family Drive-in/Drive- Attached City home through retail dwelling government Medical Dance clubs Conference offices institutions Movie theaters centers Sports arenas Day care center Planning Commission Memorandum April 14> 2005 Page 4 of 4 In addition to different zones, the Tobin Neighborhood is an area of diverse uses, from restaurants to vehicle maintenance, professional offices to warehousing. Within the R-8 zone, long-standing uses such as an 18,000 sf parking lot and some new ones (a recently licensed forge) are potentially incompatible with single- family residential. An analysis of the zoning will provide the opportunity to resolve some of these inconsistencies. In addition to this City -initiated work item, an application for a land use action, submitted by Mr. O.J. Harper (LUA 04-146) will be incorporated into the analysis of these issues. Mr. Harper has requested the rezone of an 11,000 square foot parcel, located on the south side of Tobin Street in the R-8 zone, to Commercial Arterial. He would like to provide additional parking to that already existing at his professional engineering office, located on the north side of Tobin Street in the CA zone. Parking lots would be a type of use having high compatibility with aviation operations. If however, they lead to corresponding expansion of uses that are not compatible, increasing the size of a structure or business to accommodate more people for example, then the advantage is diminished. RECOMMENDATION: It is expected that a workshop, to be scheduled in May, with Tobin Neighborhood residents and business representatives will indicate that the property owners, many of whom already consider themselves as part of "downtown Renton," would prefer a form of commercial zoning. It is recommended at this time that the existing Commercial Arterial zone along Airport Way remain and the Urban Center — Downtown be extended to include the Tobin Neighborhood, with limitations imposed to increase the compatibility of its uses and development standards. y7 AMENDMENT 2005-M-7 — SOUTHPORT REDESIGNATION FROM COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL (COR) TO URBAN CENTER NORTH (UC-N) DESCRIPTION: The area for proposed redesignation was designated COR (Commercial/Office/Residential) in 1999 in support of the Southport development. Southport is a mixed -use Master Plan development of approximately 17 acres, adjacent to Gene Coulon Park on the banks of Lake Washington. The vision for the Southport master plan was to create a vibrant mixed use community that blended recreation, employment, housing, dining, entertainment, and shopping in an urban setting. In many ways, the Southport development typifies the objectives of the Urban Center. It also provides a good example of the conversion of industrial land into mixed use, an important theme in the Comprehensive Plan for the Urban Center- North (UC-N). For these reasons, inclusion of Southport in Renton's Urban Center is desired. Changing the land use designation from COR to UC-N gives rise to the issue of rezoning the property. Southport's COR zoning is not an implementing zone of the UC-N land use designation. Geographically the development is located adjacent to the Urban Center- North 2 zone (UC-N2). Review of the development standards and uses in the COR zone and the UC- N2 zone shows distinct differences between the two zones. Major changes in the development regulations could pose problems for the development of Southport, which is already subject to a master plan and planned action. . ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Does the Southport area meet the criteria for inclusion in the Renton Urban Center? 2. Should the Southport area be rezoned from COR to UC-N2? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: The Southport area meets the criteria in the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP) and in the Renton Comprehensive Plan for inclusion in Renton's Urban Center. Therefore, it should be redesignated UC-N. Planning Commission assistance is requested as part of the decision to rezone the Southport area to UC-N2, or to keep the COR 3 zone in place. COR 3 zoning preserves the initially established development conditions for Southport. . UC-N zoning ensures more consistent development within the Urban Center and works within the existing implementation context of our Comprehensive Plan. Regardless of this decision, a handful of Title IV clean-up amendments are recommended for the COR zone. ANALYSIS: In the CPP, the Growth Management Planning Council (GMPC) designated 14 urban centers in King County, including the Renton Central Business District. Designation was based upon specific criteria, with the exact boundaries of the Urban Center determined in each jurisdiction's Comprehensive Plan. The process for designating Urban Centers and the criteria for designation are contained in the CPP's in Policies LU-39 through LU-46. Issue Paper for PC (050504).DOC\ Renton's current Urban Center met all the criteria for designation at the time it was approved — by the GMPC. Although there are not specific criteria for jurisdictions seeking to alter Urban Center boundaries, the Renton Comprehensive Plan Objective NN requires consistency with the CPP criteria for designation. These criteria include: • A maximum of %2 of the employment growth should be located in the Urban Center. • A maximum of/4 of the population growth should be located in the Urban Center. • The Urban Center should not exceed 1 %2 mil in size. • Employment density should be planned at a minimum of 50 employees per gross acre. • Residential density should be planned at a minimum of 15 households per gross acre. It is important that the Urban Center continue to meet these criteria if any changes are made. If Southport were added the existing area, the Urban Center would still meet the designation criteria. Policy LU-4 in the Renton Comprehensive Plan adopts figures for Renton's share of County residential and employment growth. According to these figures, Renton will grow by about 6,198 households and 1,976 jobs over 20 years. Using the criteria above, this means that growth should be split between the Urban Center, with 1,549.5 households and 938 jobs, and the remainder of the City, with 4,648.5 households and 938 jobs. However, Renton has excess capacity for absorbing growth, both inside and outside the Urban Center. Preparing for development that will effectively utilize excess capacity is the basis of good planning. Renton effectively meets the Urban Center criteria if the growth targets (4,648.5 households and 938 jobs) for the areas outside of the Urban Center are accommodated. Therefore, since there is capacity for more than 7,000 households and 28,000 jobs outside of the Urban Center (with Southport redesignated), the first two criteria are met. At approximately 17 acres, Southport would only add about 0.026 mil to the Urban Center, which is currently about 0.7 mi2, consistent with the third criteria that the Center should be less than 1 %2 mi2. Additionally, using the projections for employment and number of dwelling units in the master plan documents, Southport was developed to accommodate 100-150 jobs and 22-34 households per gross acre, exceeding the 50 jobs and 15 households per gross acre criteria. Adding Southport to the Urban Center does not negatively affect the ability of the area to meet the criteria from the CPP. In addition to the designation criteria, the'CPP contains a list of land use strategies that are to be used in developing the Urban Center. CPP policy LU-45 suggests the following strategies for Urban Center development: • Support pedestrian mobility, bicycle use and transit use; • Achieve a target housing density and mix of use; • Provide a wide range of capital improvement projects, such as street improvements, schools, parks and open space, public art and community facilities; • Emphasize superior urban design; • Emphasize historic preservation and adaptive reuse of historic places; • Include other local characteristics necessary to achieve a vital Urban Center; and • Include facilities to meet human service needs. The strategy outlined in LU-45 is closely aligned with the master plan already in place for Southport. Issue Paper for PC (050504).DOC\ There are numerous policies in the Renton Comprehensive Plan that set criteria pertaining to the designation and development of the Urban Center. Policy LU-195 states that the boundaries of the Center should be set with regard to a major change in land use intensity, consideration of natural features, along public rights -of -way or property lines, and within walkable distance of one or two focal points. Policy LU-197 states that the boundaries of the Urban Center may only be changed if the original mapping failed to consider a natural feature or land use that would make the boundary illogical, or, if the amount of land in the Center is inadequate to allow the envisioned development to occur. In the case of Southport, it is a logical inclusion in the Urban Center: Lake Washington is a natural physical boundary and ideal focal point for Center development and the Southport master plan represents a significant mixed -use development concept that fits well with the vision for the Urban Center North. Objective LU-BB specifically states that as industrial property is surplused, District Two will transition to high -quality living, shopping and work environments that take advantage of access to the shoreline. Overall, inclusion of Southport in the Urban Center fits the strategies for development of the Center in Comprehensive Plan Policy LU-211, including: creating investment opportunities in quality urban -scale development, promoting housing near commercial areas and employment opportunities, reducing dependency on automobiles, using land more efficiently, reducing the time and cost of permitting, maximizing public investment in infrastructure and services, and providing for the evaluation and mitigation of environmental impacts. Southport's zoning is another area for analysis. Southport comprises the third district of the COR zone (COR 3). If the Comprehensive Plan was amended to allow Southport into the Urban Center -North, either the COR 3 area would need to be rezoned to UC-N2 to match the surrounding area, or the COR 3 zone would need to be made an implementing zone of the UC-N land use designation. There are advantages and disadvantages to both situations. After reviewing the zoning regulations for this analysis it was clear that the use tables for the COR zone need to be fine tuned, whether or not the zoning for Southport is changed. Veterinary offices or clinics, convalescent centers, and recycling drop off stations, outdoor recreational facilities, indoor sport arenas and auditoriums, and outdoor sports arenas and auditoriums should all be conditional uses in the COR zone. As a result, these uses should be shown as "H", or requiring a conditional use permit reviewed by the Hearing Examiner. New indoor recreational facilities should be permitted, subject to condition 21, which stipulates that the use must be developed in conjunction with offices, residences, hotels, or convention centers and functionally integrated into the development. Indoor storage is not appropriate for the COR 3 zone and should not be allowed, thus the provision "Not allowed in COR 3" should be inserted into note 11. Additionally, the information concerning big box retail is irrelevant because it was only allowed in one place in the COR zone and that location is no longer zoned COR. Consequently, the note and use should be removed. These minor changes are not necessarily related to the re -designation of Southport as part of the Urban Center, but help to clean up inconsistencies in Title W. Given the proposed changes to COR, the zone still allows a very wide variety of uses, whereas the UC-N2 zone tends to be more restrictive. COR zoning allows a assortment of uses (some conditional) including: wireless communication facilities, model homes, some utility uses, medium and heavy manufacturing, indoor and outdoor recreational facilities, veterinary Issue Paper for PC (050504).DOC\ 3 clinics, group homes, dance halls and clubs, convalescent centers, recycling stations, and indoor storage related to retail/commercial uses. All such uses are prohibited in the UC-N2 zone, but several of these uses are unlikely to develop as part of Southport. COR regulations also tend to be less restrictive for some of the uses that are allowed in both zones, such as service and social organizations, marinas, and eating and drinking establishments. The UC- N2 zone does allow a few uses that are prohibited in the COR zone, but could be integrated into the Southport development if desired, such as transit centers and light manufacturing laboratories. Given the types of uses proposed in the Southport master plan, it probably makes very little difference if the zoning is changed to UC-N2 or if it stays COR. Examination of the difference between the development standards in the COR and UC-N2 zones shows another area of difference. COR 3 development standards are more open ended and flexible, relying heavily on site development review. The development regulations for the UC-N2 zone are much more prescriptive, for example with specified yard and setback standards. These standards were created to ensure consistent, urbane development of the urban center. Although the UC-N2 development standards are less flexible than the COR 3 standards, they would easily fit with the Southport development plan. The only standard that creates a major problem is building height, since the COR building height of 75' within 100' of the shoreline and 10 stories or 125' elsewhere is much greater than the UC-N2 standard of 10 stories along a primary or secondary arterial and 6 stories along residential or minor collectors. Unfortunately amending such a standard is difficult due to a development agreement in place with the Boeing Company. Under this development agreement, the City is not allowed to adjust the UC-N2 zoning regulations for several years without first amending the Boeing agreement. However, Southport is already subject to the Urban Center Design Overlay Guidelines, according to the adopted map at RMC 4-3-10013(6). The Urban Center Design Overlay Guidelines may ensure that development in the Urban Center -North fits well together regardless of the underlying zoning. If Southport were to remain zoned COR, COR must be allowed as an implementing zone of the UC-N land use designation. Assigning COR 3 as an implementing zone of the UC-N designation might allow any property in the Urban Center- North to be rezoned COR 3. Given the COR 3 standards are more flexible, this could potentially undermine planning efforts for the Urban Center. According to RMC 4-2-0200, the purpose of the COR zone is to 'provide for a mix of intensive office, hotel, convention center, and residential activity in a high -quality master planned development that is integrated with the natural environment. " An applicant wishing to rezone property to COR 3 could only do so as part of a master planned development proposal. Such a plan would include several levels of review of the proposed development, which would prevent the inappropriate implementation of the COR 3 zone. Furthermore, since many of the development standards in the COR 3 are negotiated through site plan review, the City has a substantial amount of input into the development of COR 3 zones elsewhere in the Urban Center. Since the Southport development is highly compatible with the purpose of the UC-N designation, it should be made a part of the Urban Center. Both the UC-N and the COR 3 zones have their drawbacks, but either is workable if Southport were part of the Urban Center. Input from the Planning Commission is needed to make a decision on the zoning of this area. Issue Paper for PC (050504).UOC\ 4 CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Whether or not the underlying zoning would remain the same, there is no overall change in capacity since Southport is subject to a master planned development. However, the capacity for up to 2,584 jobs and 581 households would be added to the designated Urban Center and taken out of the Non -Urban Center area. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: This proposal meets the review criteria for Comprehensive Plan Amendments found in Title IV 4-9-020 (at least one must be met): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. CONCLUSION: Southport and the plan for Renton's Urban Center developed along different tracks, but this master planned development exemplifies the type of mixed use development envisioned by the Comprehensive Plan. Adding Southport to the Urban Center North, and leaving the COR zoning in place by authorizing it as an implementing zone of the UC-N designation, corrects this oversight while preserving the agreements put into place during the master planning process. Issue Paper for PC (050504).DOC\ *09 CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: April 14, 2005 TO: Planning C��t/� � ion FROM: Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Comprehensive Plan Amendment 2003-M-03 WSDOT Remnant East of I-405 The City initiated review of this 21,000 square foot property in 2003 to correct an apparent mapping error and discrepancy between the Comprehensive Plan and zoning. The issue paper and maps from the 2003 effort are attached for your information. The site is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as COR while the zoning is Resource Conservation. The review process was held while the Planning Building Public Works Department and the Mayor's office worked with proponents of a bloodstock facility for fisheries to determine whether the City would support location of a fish monitoring and research facility in the Cedar River at this location. The Resource Conservation designation would support the bloodstock facility while the COR would not. The Planning Building Public Works Department's concern was that it would be much more difficult to deny the bloodstock facility if we changed the Comprehensive Plan to a designation that accommodates this use. After further review and a presentation on the bloodstock facility, the administration is supporting the concept provided all other permit and zoning issues are resolved. Consequently we are bringing the prior amendment request back for the Planning Commission's consideration. The bloodstock facility is already allowed under the existing Resource Conservation zoning as a natural resource extraction/recovery use with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. However, the Comprehensive Plan designation of Commercial Office Residential does not support this activity. The background information, analysis and recommendation from the attached 2003 issue paper are still current, however it should be noted that the names of the Comprehensive Plan Designation involved are changed from "Rural Residential" to "Low Density Residential" and from "Center Office Residential" to "Commercial Office Residential". Recommendation The recommendation is to change the designation from Commercial Office Residential to Low Density Residential. f1AEDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\2005 map amendmentsMDOT Remnant\PC update memo 4-14.doc\cor APPLICATION 2003-M-03 (LUA-01-166) LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE DESIGNATION FROM CENTER OFFICE RESIDENTIAL (COR) TO RESIDENTIAL RURAL (RR) OWNER: WSDOT APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON DESCRIPTION The proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation of a small 21,000 square foot parcel owned by the Washington State Department of Transportation from Center Office Residential (COR) to Residential Rural (RR). The subject site is located just east of the I-405 right-of-way and south of the Cedar River. The site was rezoned from the Public Use (P-1) Zone to the Resource Conservation (RC) Zone in early 2002. ISSUE SUMMARY • Technical correction to reconcile the difference between the Zoning Map as adopted by Council action and the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Approve this City initiated Land Use Map redesignation from COR to RR. No change is zoning is necessary with this action. BACKGROUND The site abuts COR designated and zoned properties to the north and across the Cedar River. On the south it abuts RR designated properties zoned RC. The remnant site is primarily an access road connecting the west side of the I-405 freeway to the former NARCO brick manufacturing plant site to the east that has now been acquired by the City for future recreational uses. The site was one of a number of remnant Public Use (P-1) zoned parcels that were rezoned in 2001 and 2002 to the City's more traditional zones by the City's Hearing Examer during the P-1 rezone process. Given the site's Land Use Map designation of COR, staff recommended zoning it to COR to be consistent with this designation. Staff also recommended doing a CPA map change and rezone this year to change it to the RR designation with RC zoning. The Hearing Examiner ignored staff's recommendation and rezoned the subject 21,000 square foot site to RC, earlier this year. The City Council concurred and approved the rezone to RC. As a consequence, the rezone is in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation of COR. It is now necessary to make this map amendment so that the Comprehensive Plan and zoning are concurrent with one another. ANALYSIS This small parcel may have been incorrectly designated COR in the first place since it is primarily roadway, and is separated from the larger COR zoned properties to the north, by the Cedar River. Although the COR zone has no minimum lot size it seems somewhat incongruent to have designated this area for mixed -use commercial, office and/or residential development here. Because the site is so small and constrained, it is unlikely that any development will occur here, let alone a mixed -use development. The site could function as part of a mixed -use office, commercial or residential development if it were physically tied to the properties to the north across the river. Since a physical connection is unlikely staff believes it makes more sense to redesignate the site consistent with the abutting properties to its south and east. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2004\Map Amendments 2004\WSDOT Remnaut\2002-M-03 Issue Paper. doc2002-M -03 Issue Paper.doc\ CAPACITY ANALYSIS Below is the calculated theoretical capacity for the subject site assuming COR zoning with residential use and RC zoning. It should be noted that given the site's size no development is likely unless it is tied in with other properties in the future. IVlode�ed Tlieorei� g i^i' 9 alk 'i4th p� ➢ten Pi MOP Estimated Residential 12.0 units 1.0 unit Capacity based upon .48 acres COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE The following objective and policy are the most relevant of those listed in the Residential Rural sub - element: Objective LU-l. Preserve open space and natural resources and protect environmentally sensitive areas by limiting residential development in critical areas, areas identified as part of a city-wide or regional open space network or agricultural lands within the City. Policy LU-32. Residential Rural areas may be incorporated into community separators. As noted above the subject site is unlikely to develop and abuts an area currently designated RR and part of a city and county regional open space network. This designation minimizes impacts to the adjacent Cedar River as well and is more appropriate for this site than the current COR designation which is intended to provide for `large-scale office, retail and/or multi -family projects developed through a master plan incorporating significant site amenities and/or gateway features." AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA RMC 4-9-020, Comprehensive Plan Adoption and Amendment Process requires that a proposal demonstrate that the requested amendment is timely and meets at least one of the following: A. Review Criteria for Comprehensive Plan Amendments: 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The proposed redesignation from COR to RR appears to the support the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan Vision Statement under Future Open Space and Parks. "Throughout the City, and extending beyond the City boundaries, would be continuous corridors of green blending into outlying rural areas. The corridors would form a network of public and private open space running through and around the City and its neighborhoods, and providing separation between more dense urban areas. " HAMNSMomp P1an\Amendments\2004\Map Amendments 2004\WSDOT Remnant\2002-M-03 Issue Paper.doc2002-M-03 Issue Paper.doc\ "Some of the network would be land that is protected from extensive development to protect sensitive area; such as steep slopes, wetland and stream corridors. Some would be publicly owned park land. Some of the network would also include low density "rural" residential areas which would be boundaries between urban areas or neighborhoods, be environmentally sensitive, or have special scenic value. " This minor site is at the western tip of a much larger RR designated open space corridor of hillsides and open space extending from the heart of the City beyond its easternmost city limits toward Fairwood and Maple Valley. The future use of the site as access to the recreational complex planned to the east is consistent with the vision and purpose of the RR designation. ZONING CONCURRENCY A concurrent rezone is not required in light of the current zoning on the subject site. CONCLUSION Given its size, location, and current use, the site will probably never develop. Its current COR land use designation appears to be a mapping error given the site's isolation from the larger properties across the Cedar River to the north that also have this designation and the fact that this designation "provides for large-scale office, retail and/or multi -family projects developed through a master plan". The RR designation, on the other hand, is intended to preserve open space and protect environmentally sensitive areas identified as part of a citywide or regional open space network, or agricultural lands within the City. Because this site is at the western tip of such an existing open space corridor running east along the south side of the Cedar River that has this designation, RR is the most logical land use designation for this small remnant site. RTI)NSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2004\Map Amendments 2004\WSDOT Remnant\2002-M-03 Issue Paper.doc2002-M-03 Issue Paper.doc\ > CD I WSDOT - River (2003-M-03) Vicinity Map 'Olt-K. Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning U Alex Pietsch; Administrator ��//// G. Del Rosario 3 July 2003 0 500 1000 Study Area 1 : 6000 WS DOT - River (2003-M-03) Sensitive Areas Map Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning r.` ♦ Alex Pietsch, Administrator t ■■ - G. Del Rosario 3 July 2003 Study Area Flood Boundary Cedar River 4z=� >40% Slope 0 100 200 1 : 2400 T-I �-Y ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, + 's + NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: May 26, 2005 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager SUBJECT: Amendment 05-T-1 Text Amendment to the Introduction of the Comprehensive Plan The Introduction to the Comprehensive Plan was not revised during the 2004 update. Staff is now reviewing and modifying the Introduction to update the descriptions of the comprehensive plan and planning process, update the trends descriptions and the data presented in the document. The document is presented to you in the "revisions accepted" mode because it is essentially re -written. The existing Introduction section is copied and included in your packet for comparison purposes. At the meeting staff will present a summary of the changes, and request your input on the content. No action is requested at this meeting. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\Comprehensive Plan (2005 text amendments)Wemo Re 05-T-1 Introduction.doc CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTRODUCTION It is the City of Renton's primary responsibility to provide public services and facilities, develop policies, and adopt regulations that ensure the public health, safety, and welfare of its citizens. The City government is also charged with directing the growth of the City so that quality of life of the community and opportunities for its citizens remain high. The guide for Renton's growth and development is the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan and the Growth Management Act The City of Renton Comprehensive Plan (Plan) is in compliance with the Washington State Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA). The GMA requires cities and counties in rapidly growing areas to adopt Comprehensive Plans that include policy direction for land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities, and transportation. All parts of the Plan must be consistent with each other and with adopted statewide, regional, and countywide planning goals. Statewide planning goals include provisions that discourage urban sprawl, support affordable housing, protect the environment, and support provision of adequate urban services. In addition to these requirements, plans must be designed to accommodate 20- year growth forecasts, determined by regional agencies and local jurisdictions, within well-defined "urban growth areas." Regional or countywide planning has defined "urban centers" in locations where concentrations of people and uses that can be served by transit are desirable. Cities and counties have worked cooperatively to identify where the provision of urban services may be appropriate (the Urban Growth Areas), and where rural levels of service, agriculture and low -density population and low intensity uses will be situated (Rural Areas). Regional policy provides for "urban separators" between and within urban areas to define and shape communities, to protect significant environmentally constrained lands, and provide urban open space. The Plan is a broad statement of community goals, objectives, and policies that directs the orderly and coordinated physical development of the City. Renton's Plan anticipates change and provides specific guidance for future legislative and administrative actions. It is the result of citizen involvement, technical analysis, and the creativity and experience of decision -makers in City government. The vision, goals, objectives, policies, and maps of the Plan provide the foundation for the regulations, programs, and services that implement the Plan. The Plan serves as a guide for designating land uses, infrastructure development, and community services. The Plan is designed to be a functional document that guides Renton's future development and fulfills the City's regional responsibilities toward state -mandated growth management. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\Comprehensive Plan (2005 text amendments)\Introduction2.docLast printed 5/26/2005 1:47 PM The Plan contains background information on Renton's history and profile, citywide trends, and local and regional growth projections. The Plan summarizes a Vision for Renton that has been endorsed by the community. The chapters or "Elements" of the Plan contain goals, objectives, and policies that further the evolution of the City toward attaining that Vision. The Comprehensive Plan includes the following State mandated "Elements". • Capital Facilities • Housing • Land Use • Transportation • Utilities Renton also includes the following Optional Elements • Community Design • Economic Development • Environment • Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails • Human Services Sub -Area Plans and Neighborhoods The Comprehensive Plan is a citywide document that provides policy guidance based on specified issues, topics, and land use designations. The many neighborhoods within the City are not differentiated except for the South Renton portion of the Urban Center - Downtown. The Plan includes a sub -area plan for the South Renton area, adopted by the City Council in 2002. A sub -area plan for the Highlands area is currently under development with adoption anticipated in 2006. The Cedar River Corridor sub -area is prioritized for consideration of a sub -area plan in the 2006 work program. The sub -area plans provide a focused vision for the geographical area, and additional policy direction on land use, capital improvements including transportation, and utilities. They also include prototypical redevelopment and concepts for housing and street improvements. Page 2 of 15 The Planning Process Renton residents, business owners, and City staff work together to shape the future of the community through the ongoing development of the Plan. The planning process provides an opportunity for individual citizens to contribute to this effort by attending community meetings to identify, study, and resolve issues of concern or by serving on committees, task forces, boards, or commissions that function as citizen advisors to the City Council (Council). Because public input is vital to effective planning, community groups, businesses, and individuals are invited and encouraged to work with City staff to identify and achieve community goals. The following principles should guide the planning process: • Encourage and facilitate public participation in all phases of the planning process. • Work to ensure that the planning process is accessible to all citizens, that it is consistent, timely, and can be widely understood by all potential participants. • Base land use decisions on the interests of the entire community and the goals and policies of the Plan. • Demonstrate that proposed land use change responds to the interests and needs of the entire City and the neighborhoods directly impacted by the project, as well as the property owner and the project proponent. _ • Balance the interests of commercial and residential communities when considering modifications to zoning or development regulations. • Encourage and emphasize open communication between developers and neighbors about land use issues. • Strive for compatibility of land, use within the City. The primary responsibility for formulating the Plan rests with the Planning Commission (Commission). The Commission is a committee of citizen volunteers, appointed by the Mayor, to make recommendations to the Council for land use policy changes to the Plan. Before making a recommendation, the Commission conducts public hearings on behalf of the Council. The Commission weights information and comments presented by individual citizens and community organizations as it prepares Plan revision recommendations to the Council. The Council makes the final planning decisions. The Council is responsible for initiating plan reviews, considering Commission recommendations, and adopting amendments to the Plan. To implement the Plan, the Council is also responsible for adopting the City budget, regulations and programs, levying taxes, and making appropriations. Page 3 of 15 Changing the Comprehensive Plan Because the City is constantly evolving, it may be occasionally necessary to make revisions to the Plan. These changes are in the form of amendments to the Plan. The Council considers amendments to the Plan, based on recommendations made by the Commission, once a year (unless in the case of an emergency). The Mayor, Council, Commission, or private parties may submit proposed amendments. Implementing the Comprehensive Plan After adoption of the Plan, the next step toward realizing the City's Vision is implementation. The Plan is implemented through a variety of programs and functional systems plans including water and sewer plan, parks, recreation and trails plan, transit and transportation corridor studies, human services programs, the City's housing repair program, and the Capital Improvement Plan. The City's subdivision and zoning regulations also implement the plan. Figure 1 illustrates the Comprehensive Plan Elements and implementing plans and programs. Figure 1 GMA COMPR8HENSIVE PLAN AND IMPLEMENTATING PLANS/REGULATIONS ONOMC LOPMEN SERVICES EEI WJp USE] I TIONAL PIALS TW�KPOHTATION EHE�EflP]I Implemented By. Capli FactW— DWO Gkid &l Busarees ESA Acton Plan Block Plan'Ot-W Pemstrn.N Grants Pmgrana Skbddvon May Creek Basin Plan Hosing cbphw lrnprov--A ParMhfl Cly Pry Pm Ra9Vationa Zonig D"M Gksdelinee SEPA IMg Coup' Cwnp� PwKA—Mion Sh---Mari Housing 60pen Span PI°9ram Conaonfum Plan ree Stt✓ ConsWkbd d Sbrivison P-" P OMSOrra SUeetar5tb6viaion PwWn9 ReV+laiona Plan Fn Cap!W Faciiliee pwnlon Plan Zoni+9 WPoA Plena AkAMdty Plan sutace Water Utility CapWi FaciXtles Plan Trenaporw— CwW FacWies plan Wastewater Capital Faciities plan Wier Capita FaoWiea Plan A" Land Uw C—"IblEty Plan Deeigu Gudekm Flfstoricel kr✓er�Y OTAK Dov"o pl.. SEPA St." sbclm on Parkig Roo,"Ions SDArea Ph— D—A-W Ceder Park SotAh Pardon Zoning Capital Airport Mastx Pun hnp--..A plan Updw. Canpmh-.k- Six Year Perk PA —Wien. Tranapod.Oon &Open Space Impmvemerd Plan Pmyrem Deign Guidefnea Trace Maier Plan Zang O-V..— Sold Was. Management plan Lag Page Wad-dw klenagon`-M Pun Buse Water P—n l Waikmator System Plan Water system :ortprdransiw Ph. Page 4 of 15 CITY OF RENTON BACKGROUND Location and Physical Setting Renton is located at the south end of Lake Washington on the edge of metropolitan and rural King County. Renton covers more than 17 square miles of land and is bordered by King County, Kent, Tukwila, Newcastle, and Bellevue with Seattle nearby. Its location, approximately equidistant from the central business districts of Seattle and Bellevue and within proximity to Tacoma, places Renton in the center of a region that is the economic hub of the Northwest. The City is at the crossroads of a regional transportation network where seven state and federal highways converge and is central to regional, national, and international air travel. The natural features that define the edges of the City and its neighborhoods include the lake, hills, plateaus, stream corridors, and river valleys. While development over time has changed the appearance of the community, the natural features have generally remained constant. Abundant, green wooded areas characterize the hillsides encircling the downtown and along the Cedar River, May and Honey Creeks. The topography and location of the City afford beautiful views of a variety of significant natural features including Mt. Rainier, Lake Washington, and the Olympic and Cascade Mountains. Renton's residential areas have traditionally been organized around schools, parks, and other institutions. Both new and existing neighborhoods offer diverse housing stock that is wide-ranging in unit size, style, type, and price. Although it is one of the older cities within the region, Renton still has vacant and underused land in many neighborhoods, including the downtown, that offer an opportunity for growth. Renton`s Past Duwamish Native Americans were the earliest known people to live in what is now Renton. The Duwamish had their village near the confluence of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Black Rivers, at the base of Earlington Hill. In 1853, east coast entrepreneur Henry Tobin arrived, and recognizing the advantages of the physical location, laid claim to the area near where the Cedar entered the Black River. Being at the confluence of two rivers near a large lake was thought to be ideal for siting a future city for industrial and commercial growth, with the opportunity for navigable transportation nearby. Officers of the Renton Coal Company formally established the City of Renton in 1875 with the filing of a plat. That plat included what is now the downtown core.1 Early industries and businesses included coal mining, lumber harvesting, brick making, and rail and freight transportation. Early grocery stores and other family -run stores were located in what is presently downtown Renton. Both the Walla Walla Railroad and the Page 5 of 15 Puget Sound Electric Railway linked the downtown core to other communities. In its early days, Renton had many businesses including banking and drug, hardware, junk, grocery, clothing, and home furnishings stores. In 1901, upon incorporation, the City had a total area of one square mile. Since then, incremental annexations have increased the size of the City to encompass approximately 17.3 square miles. Employment in Renton was dominated by industry from when the City was first settled in the mid 1800's. Because of the nearby forests and proximity to water for transport, the first local industry was timber harvesting and processing. Beginning in the 1870's and continuing through the 1940's, Renton was known for its coal mining and brick making operations. Other industries included production and transport of lumber, and the supply of steel, pig iron, and equipment to railroad companies. During this period, the City established itself as an important industrial center. The identification by the US Navy of Renton's location on Lake Washington as ideal for production of a "flying boat," prior to the nation's entry into World War II, was a significant turning point in the history of the City. Only one was actually produced, but that project led to what became the home of future aircraft that changed the aviation industry. The Navy transferred the land to the US Army and The Boeing Company Renton Plant subsequently produced the B-29 high -altitude bomber for the Army Air Corps. Renton has also been the location of Pacific Car and Foundry (PACCAR) since the beginning of the twentieth century. During World War H, PACCAR transitioned from building railroad cars to Sherman tanks. The Boeing Company's manufacturing and assembly plant at the south end of Lake Washington dramatically influenced the City's future. Rapid growth of The Boeing Company and PACCAR accelerated the City's rise as a regional industrial and employment center. In the decade from 1940-1950, Renton was transformed from a small town of 4,500 to a thriving city with a population of 16,039. With the shift away from rail, toward automobile and truck transportation in the 1940s and 1950's, a new type of regional transportation hub was created in Renton. Two major freeways (Interstate 405 and SR 167) and three State highways (SR 900, 515, and 169) augmented and replaced the rail system. This road system was developed to provide a regional network allowing access around Lake Washington to serve the Renton industrial area. During this period, the transportation demand shifted from exporting raw materials to importing a major work force. The industrial employment centers developed at the same locations formerly occupied by extractive industries --perhaps in part because the transportation network to serve these sites was already well established. This became important because the industrial area remained in the heart of the City and was served by a transportation network that converged on the downtown area. Page 6 of 15 As the twenty-first century begins, Renton is again experiencing transition of its downtown industrial area, as the Boeing Renton Plant within Renton's Urban Center becomes available for redevelopment as mixed -use residential, retail/commercial, office, and light industrial uses. Once again, the transportation network will further the transition. Community Profile Renton has grown from a single square mile on the shore of the lake, to over 17 square miles spread across the Cedar and Green River Valley floors and onto the adjacent hills. Once separated by rural areas and open space, Renton and its neighbor cities are growing together and have become part of the larger Puget Sound metropolitan region. Incorporated in 1901, Renton is fifth oldest of King County's 39 cities and ranks fifth in the County in population size.2 Renton is the fourteenth most populous city in the state and King County is the seventeenth most populous county in the nation.2 The 2000 U.S. Census indicated that Renton had a population increase over the previous ten years of more than 20 percent. Only 1.5 percent of the increase is attributable to annexations. An increase in population of almost 10 percent between 2000 and 2003 indicates that Renton has become one of the fastest growing cities in King County.3 Renton is currently home to 54,900 people.4 In Renton, the largest age group of the population are people of working age (18 to 64 years) at 34,016, five to seventeen year - olds number 7,392, those sixty-five and over number 5,123, and 3,521 are under five. 2 The median age is 35.7 years. As the population of the City grows, it also becomes more diverse. The 2000 census indicated that 68 percent of the population considers itself as white, a change from 84 percent from the previous census. Both the Asian/Pacific Islander and Hispanic/Latino populations more than doubled during the 1990s and the number of Hispanic students in Renton schools increased by 379 percent.3 An additional 63,600 people live in the unincorporated area surrounding the City in the Fairwood area (40,600), on West Hill/Bryn Mawr/Skyway (14,300), and on the East Plateau (8,700).4 The median household income in 1990 of $32,393 increased almost 30 percent by 2000 to $45,8202. The average wealth of Renton households is $226,395.5 Approximately 8.5 percent of the working age population (18 to 64) lives below the poverty level2. The assessed value of Renton's land area (in thousands of dollars) is 6,272,632.E Almost 52,000 people work for 2,312 employerss and at 1,517 businesses in Renton. These jobs are divided into sectors by type. Manufacturing, with almost 21,000 jobs, remains Renton's largest sector. This indicates that The Boeing Company and PACCAR remain major players in the local and regional economy. The next most significant sector, with 11,413 employees, is the Finance, Insurance, Real Estate, and other Services sector.2 Page 7 of 15 Additional information summarizing Renton population and household characteristics is available in the document "The Changing Face of Renton" prepared by the City Human Services Division of the Community Services Department. This document summarizes the 2000 Census data for the population within Renton's year 2000 city boundaries and is available on the City's website at www.ci.renton.wa.us. Additional information about populations in the unincorporated areas surrounding the City is available from the King County Annual Growth Report available on the County website at www.metrokc.gov. TRENDS Renton, historically, has been a small town and in many ways it still resembles a small city. But several factors place it on the threshold of change: the continuing transition of Renton's industrial sector; regional population growth; and its location at the crossroads of local, national, and international transportation. These factors foreshadow a new role for Renton as an important metropolitan center in the region. Renton, along with the rest of the Northwest, has been experiencing an increase in professional and service jobs over the past few years. Boeing's related research and development facilities in and around Renton were a major factor in the development of office parks south of the downtown and at the north end of the Green River Valley. At the same time, there has been increased demand for goods and services as evidenced by the number and types of commercial businesses in the City. Vacant land remains scattered throughout Renton, but as infill development continues, land will become an increasingly scarce resource. Some vacant land, located outside of the Urban Center, may be environmentally sensitive and not suitable for full development. As annexations occur, more undeveloped land will become available. In 2005, there are approximately 975 acres of vacant and developable land within the City of Renton. Of this, the largest blocks of vacant land are generally found in Renton's outlying areas. Smaller parcels that are available for development can be found in the City's existing neighborhoods. [Note: For a discussion of trends in residential land use, see the Housing Element of this Plan] The challenge for Renton is to manage growth in a manner that maintains the desirable features of the City while being flexible enough to take advantage of opportunities for change. Urban Center As the twentieth century closed, development occurring outside of the City affected the character of Renton. Regional shopping centers competing with Renton's downtown retail core resulted in a shift in marketable goods in the downtown from general merchandise to specialty items. In response, several significant developments were made to begin the transition from a stagnant small town core to a new urban center. City - initiated redevelopment of the Piazza area, including a central park, multi -story public parking garage, a transit center, and performing arts center enhanced several privately initiated mixed -use residential / commercial developments. Page 8 of 15 In addition to this energetic infusion of creative energy and financing in the Urban Center -Downtown, changes in The Boeing Company business plan resulted in a concept for the Urban Center -North, comprised of almost 300 acres of the Boeing Renton Plant site. This is the first step toward transition of an area used for industrial manufacturing for over sixty years into an urban mixed -use neighborhood. Within the next few years, as the first redevelopment of the Boeing Renton Plant area occurs, it is anticipated that major national retailers will locate in Renton providing additional economic development for the City, and a wide range of goods and services within Renton's Urban Center. As this change occurs, it is anticipated that Renton's historic downtown will be rejuvenated as a mixed -use specialty retail/ residential area while the Urban Center -North will become a new urban community incorporating employment, retail, residential and entertainment sectors. Commercial Corridors Due to relatively low land cost, a number of low intensity, suburban -type commercial areas exist along Renton's commercial corridors. This pattern of development will likely continue until land values rise. Evidence of this development pattern can be seen along Rainier Blvd and NE 4`b Street. Strip commercial is another common result of low intensity development, especially along principal and major arterial routes; one example is along both sides of Benson Road, south of Carr/SE 176th. The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element sets a policy directing transition of these areas away from strip commercial development patterns in the future. The objective is to use site planning tools to connect businesses and residential areas as well as promote more attractive vehicular corridors and parking areas. The City is undertaking several major corridor studies anticipating boulevard treatments encompassing improvements in transit accessibility, pedestrian use, traffic flow, efficient business access and corridor landscaping. It is anticipated that the major commercial corridors will be evaluated for boulevard treatments over the next several years. Institution The expansion of the Valley Medical Center is expected to continue, although like Renton Technical College, available land is limited. As both of these institutional uses grow to serve the region, they will need to expand beyond their current boundaries or intensify land use within existing campuses. Industrial Industrial employment, especially manufacturing, is declining nation-wide. In the Puget Sound region, while the proportion of jobs in the industrial sector is projected to decline, the number of manufacturing jobs in this area is expected to remain relatively stable, at least through the year 2020. In Renton, the most noticeable changes are occurring in the mix and type of industrial activities within the City. Most noticeable is a trend away from heavy industrial/manufacturing toward medium and light industrial uses. Although manufacturing is expected to remain stable and industrial jobs are expected to decline, the Page 9 of 15 number of light and medium industrial jobs in wholesale/transportation/communications/ utilities is projected to nearly double in the Renton area through 2020. Renton sees itself as an ideal market area for uses based on the biotechnology industry. In addition to Renton, several Puget Sound Region urban areas are competing for this niche market. Changes are expected to occur in Renton's heavy industrial employment incrementally over a long period of time. Some heavy industrial areas, such as the Boeing Renton Plant in North Renton, are being redeveloped into other uses that will largely replace industrial employment with other types. Other City heavy industrial sites subject to redevelopment may have inadequate infrastructure or high costs of hazardous material cleanup that could limit redevelopment or delay it until land value and demand increases. In other cases, viable heavy industrial uses exist and will continue to operate for several years, but property owners may anticipate a change in use over the long term. Although the rate of change in industrial lands is slow, it is significant because if too much land is converted to non -industrial uses, it could have a detrimental effect on retaining the industrial base. Within the Green River Valley, land use policy changed over the last ten years to allow a market -driven transition from industrial and warehousing uses to general commercial and retail. While existing industrial businesses are encouraged to operate and expand, they are no longer protected by an industrial -only protective zoning policy. Office In Renton, commercial uses and services were adversely affected by the downturn in the information technology industry in the late 1990's. The biggest impact of this event however, was on office vacancies, which rose significantly and at mid -decade, were just starting to turn around. This situation slowed the demand for office and service uses, which until then were healthy indicators of the regional and local shift from an industrial base to a service base. Another trend is a blurring of land use category descriptions as technology changes the way work is done and more activities include office and computer components. This change is manifested by an increase in the mixes of uses, either within one company or within one building or complex. For example, many businesses are constellations of light industrial, manufacturing, research and'development, and office uses. The ideal situation, in terms of regional needs (reduction of traffic on arterials for example), may be to add residential uses to that mix. Annexation and City Boundary Regional planning policies envision urban developed areas becoming part of cities throughout King County, and stipulate that the County will become a regional rather than local service provider. Over the last ten years, many previously unincorporated areas were either annexed into existing cities or incorporated into new cities. King County is increasing unable to provide local services to the remaining unincorporated urban areas due to budget constraints. The trend toward transitioning urban areas into cities is expected to accelerate over the next several years as King County implements the envisioned change in its governance responsibilities. It is anticipated that decisions will Page 10 of 15 be made over the next ten years affecting each of the remaining unincorporated urban areas. In 1995, as part of review and ratification of the Countywide Planning Policies, Renton identified several of these unincorporated areas as places where the City could logically provide services over the next 20 years and designated them as Renton's Potential Annexation Area (PAA). These areas are included within Renton's Comprehensive Plan and the policies and land use designations of this Plan will be applied upon future annexation. Renton's PAA includes the East Renton Plateau, Fairwood/Cascade Vista, and the Siena Heights neighborhood between Renton and Newcastle. In addition, the West Hill area, while not formally part of the PAA, has many connections to the City through the Renton School District, commercial shopping patterns and park/recreation usage. The City will consider inclusion of the West Hill in the 2005 work program. Currently residents of the Fairwood area are considering an incorporation petition that would form a new city including Fairwood and a portion of Cascade Vista. It is anticipated that annexations within these PAA areas will significantly increase the land area and population of Renton over the next ten years. There are three types of annexations that may be initiated by property owners or by the City: 1) annexation of large, undeveloped parcels that can now be provided with City of Renton utility service, 2) annexation of smaller infill parcels that are already developed at urban densities, but lack urban levels of services such as sewer, and 3) annexation of commercial areas and/or residential neighborhoods that have already developed in King County to county standards. Schools The City of Renton is presently served primarily by the Renton School District, although a small area at the City's eastern boundary is within the Issaquah School District. The PAA is served by Renton School District (Cascade Vista, Sierra Heights, West Hill), the Kent School District (Fairwood), and the Issaquah School District (East Renton Plateau). Following its peak in 1970, Renton School District enrollment declined at the rate of 15 percent during the 1970's and 10% during the 1980's. Enrollment increased, however between 1990 and 2000, by 18 percent. The Renton District currently has adequate capacity for growth within its attendance area and has not requested that the City collect school impact fees on its behalf. In the future, however, larger enrollments and an increased need for facilities in the district is anticipated based on projected population growth within the city and the PAA. The proportion of Renton residents served by the Issaquah School District on the East Renton Plateau will increase as lands within the PAA come into the City. Expected population growth in the area served by the Issaquah School District is expected to support expansion of school facilities in this area. Renton is currently collecting impact fees for the Issaquah School District and expects to continue doing so. Renton will only be served by the Kent School District if the Fairwood portion of the PAA eventually annexes into the City. Page i 1 of 15 Religious Centers The trend over the past few decades has been for religious groups to provide a wider range of services to their members and the public at large. Food banks, teen clubs, adult day care, and K through 12 schools are a few of the faith -based functions now offered by the religious community. These services require additional land and facilities for classrooms, gymnasiums, offices, parking, and social services. Hours of worship, once primarily limited to the weekend, have expanded to include other activities on weekdays and evenings. As a result, these facilities are having a greater impact on adjacent neighborhoods and the existing infrastructure but are also providing local based service and facilities serving a broader population. Parks, Recreation and Open Space Renton has a well -designed and maintained parks and recreation system serving the needs of residents of the City and PAA. City facilities and programs are currently planned to accommodate a mix of resident and non-resident participants. Additional parks facilities are anticipated within the City to continue to provide neighborhood parks in developing areas. At the present time, City recreation programs and facilities are open to non -city residents on an increased fee basis. If growth occurs in the city limits without annexation, existing facilities will be increasingly unavailable to non-residents. The anticipated trend in parks services is for Renton to take over County developed parks and undeveloped future park sites as annexation occurs. Expansion of parks facilities will be required to keep pace with population growth. Renton supports an ambitious open space/greenway acquisition program, preserving natural areas in an urban environment, and ensuring public access to these areas with limited development and disturbances. It is expected that many of the sites acquired will remain relatively undisturbed, while wildlife and habitat areas that are less fragile will be more developed with park and recreation facilities and allow greater public use. Transportation There is one unchanging transportation trend within the region: traffic is increasing. Several factors are responsible for this: the growth in population, jobs, and housing; an increase in people commuting by single -occupant vehicles within the region and making longer trips; the location of employment and price of housing, which influences the length and type of trip made; and new housing development that is occurring on vacant land in outlying parts of the metropolitan area rather than on land closer to traditional urban centers (again, a function of the cost of housing and its relationship to the scale of wages; and the relocation of employment areas to suburban areas (frequently a function of land and transportation costs). The cumulative effects of these factors are more cars on the road and greater traffic congestion. One measure of this is the average length of commute time, which has increased countywide since 1990 by 2 to 3 minutes to 30.4 minutes. The total round-trip commute between Tukwila and Bellevue at AM and PM peak times has increased from 50 minutes in 2000 to 55 in 2002. Interestingly, while the AM peak commute from Page 12 of 15 Auburn to Renton via SR-167 took 3 minutes longer in 2002 than in 2000, the reverse trip during the PM peak took 2 minutes less. At the same time, transit ridership decreased in the King County / Puget Sound Region by 5 percent since 2000. This may be attributable to the downturn in the economy and corresponding job loss in the group of people who depend on public transportation. If this is the case, as economic recovery occurs, ridership should increase. In Renton, the South Renton Park and Ride lot is used at the rate of 102 percent. This indicates that vehicles are parked outside of and adjacent to the lot for the purpose of using the transit system. Although a small number, the fact of its increase in the decade of the `90s makes the 8 percent of people who walk or work at home significant. This is a trend that is expected to continue as more people telecommute and/or develop home -based businesses that are dependent on the internet. There has also been an increase in the number of people who commute by bicycle. Planning for improved and safer bike lanes may contribute to this trend. Road condition in terms of the need for overlay, re -pavement, or reconstruction is another factor affecting the City's ability to maintain an efficient and safe transportation system. Using the Overall Condition Index as the rating scale (Centerline Software from Measurement Research Corporation), Renton has 29.0 lane miles in need of repaving/rehabilitation out of a total 450.7 lane miles. At an estimated cost of $75,862 per lane mile, 57.3 percent of the amount needed was budgeted in 2004.E Significant improvements are planned for the Interstate-405 corridor. The City of Renton is working closely with the Washington State Department of Transportation on the I-405 Congestion Relief and Bus Rapid Transit Projects. The smaller "nickel" project is funded through the nickel gas tax of 2003 to fund highway improvements in Washington State. Three projects were funded on I-405, including a South Renton/Tukwila project, which will add one new northbound lane from SR 181 to SR 167, and one new southbound lane from SR 169 to SR 167. The project afso improves SR 167 near the interchange with I- 405. Preliminary design for future project phases is also moving forward. These project phases are not fully funded, but ultimate design would include two new lanes in each direction on I-405, auxiliary lanes where appropriate, and improved interchanges, including the SR 167/I-405 interchange. These are long-term improvements that represent the ultimate build -out or Master Plan of I405. The Implementation Plan also includes two new lanes in each direction but is an interim level of improvements, particularly for the SR 167/I-405 interchange. As part of a long-term strategy, the Master Plan builds on the Implementation Plan. Most economic and growth trends will be impacted by the ability to physically move through the City and Region and get from one place to another. Therefore, transportation remains a key element in the overall economic picture. Page 13 of 15 Airport The Renton Municipal Airport is a heavily used facility and demand on the Airport continues to increase steadily. This is primarily due to the Airport's function as a "reliever" facility for air traffic from the Seattle/Tacoma Airport. The other nearby reliever airport, Boeing Field (the King County International Airport), is frequently unavailable because it is functioning at about 98 percent capacity. Closure of other general aviation airports in the region such as those that were at Bellevue, Issaquah, and Kent also increased the demand for small private planes and corporate jets use in Renton. In addition, there is increased activity at the Will Rogers / Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base due to closure of similar facilities elsewhere in the region. The expected trend is continued demand at the Airport. This demand may be balanced, somewhat, by a corresponding decrease in Airport use by The Boeing Company as it changes the nature of its business in Renton. For example, 2004 saw the closing of the Boeing 757 production line. Since the Renton Airport is the existing facility used for Boeing aircraft following assembly, this change and other Boeing corporate changes will undoubtedly affect the Airport. The timing of anticipated changes, however, remains unknown to the City. Public Facilities In Renton, the late 1990's and early part of the next decade saw a significant increase in the inventory of major public facilities. These include the development of a "central park" (the Piazza in downtown), a public parking garage, a transit center, a performing arts center, a skateboard park, and a new public water park. This trend is expected to continue as Renton develops its Urban Center and as population growth continues. GROWTH PROJECTIONS (Reserved for later review) 1. Renton, Where the Water Took Wing, David M. Buerge 2. "The 2003 King County Annual Growth Report," Office of Management and Budget 3. "The Changing Face of Renton," City of Renton, Department of Community Services, Human Services Division Washington State, Office of Financial Management 4. City of Renton, Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning 5. Renton Chamber of Commerce 6. King County, Office of Management and Budget and King County, Department of Assessments 7. "Benchmark Report, September 2004," Transportation and Environment, King County, Office of Management and Budget Page 14 of 15 8. "The 2004 Long -Term Economic and Labor Force Forecast for Washington," Washington State, Employment Security Department and the Office of Financial Management Page 15 of 15 EXISTING INTRODUCTION SECTION FOR COMPARISON THE PLANNING PROCESS Why Plan? It is the city government's responsibility to provide public services and facilities, develop policies, and adopt regulations to guide the growth of a city that meets the needs of its people. The guide for Renton's growth and development is the Comprehensive Plan. What is a Comprehensive Plan? A comprehensive plan is a broad statement of community goals and policies that direct the orderly _and coordinated physical development of a city into the future. A comprehensive plan anticipates change and provides specific guidance for future legislative and administrative actions. It reflects the results of citizen involvement, technical analysis, and the judgment of decision -makers. The Vision, goals, objectives, policies, and maps of the plan provide the basis for the adoption of regulations, programs, and services which implement the plan. The plan serves as a guideline for designating land uses and infrastructure development as well as developing community services. Who Plans? Renton residents, business owners, and City staff work together to shape the future of their community through the ongoing development of the Comprehensive Plan. The planning process provides an opportunity for individual citizens to contribute to this effort by attending community meetings to identify issues of concern or by serving on boards or commissions that function as citizen advisors to the City Council. The primary responsibility for formulating the Comprehensive Plan rests with the Planning Commission. The Commission is a citizens' committee appointed by the Mayor to make recommendations to the Council for land use or policy changes to the Comprehensive Plan. Before making a recommendation, the Commission conducts public hearings on behalf of the Council. Information and comments presented by individual citizens and citizen organizations are weighed by the Planning Commission as it prepares a recommendations to City Council for revisions to the Plan. The ultimate planning decisions are made by the City Council. The Council is responsible for initiating plan reviews, considering Planning Commission recommendations, and adopting the Comprehensive Plan. To implement the Plan, the Council is also responsible for adopting the City's budget, regulations and programs, and for levying taxes and making appropriations. Citizen Participation Because public input is vital to effective planning, the City encourages community groups, businesses, and individuals to work together with City staff to identify and achieve community goals. The following principles should guide all future planning efforts: Encourage and facilitate public participation in all planning processes and make those processes user- friendly. Consider the interests of the entire community and the goals and policies of this Plan before making land use decisions. Proponents of change in landt use should demonstrate that the proposed change responds to the interests and changing needs of the entire City, balanced with the interests of the neighborhoods most directly impacted by the project. Ensure that the process which identifies new commercial areas or expands existing areas considers the impacts of potential development on affected residential neighborhoods and results in decisions that are consistent with other policies in the Comprehensive Plan_ Balance the interests of the commercial and residential communities when considering modifications to zoning or development regulations. Encourage and emphasize open communication between developers and neighbors about compatibility issues. What's in this Plan? This comprehensive plan is designed to be a readable, functional document that will guide Renton's future development and fulfill the City's regional responsibilities in growth management. This plan contains community history and profile, trends, growth projections and the Vision. Each of the elements that follow contain goals, objectives and policies. How is the Plan Implemented? After adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the first step toward realizing the City's vision is implementation. Examples of implementation measures are: revisions to the Zoning Code, development of a Neighborhood Enhancement Program, participation in the King County Historic Preservation Program, and creation of incentives for private development to incorporate community design features such as public gathering places, art, street furniture and landscaping. Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan After proper study and deliberation, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan may be recommended by the Planning Commission to the City Council. The City Council will consider amendments to the Plan not _ more than annually, except for emergencies. Proposed amendments may be submitted during the first quarter of the year by the Mayor, Planning Commission, City Council, or private parties. GMA: The City of Renton is revising its Comprehensive Plan in compliance with the State of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990. This legislation requires cities in rapidly growing areas to adopt Comprehensive Plans which include land use, housing, capital facilities, utilities and transportation elements. All elements of the Comprehensive Plan must be consistent with each other and with state-wide and county -wide adopted planning goals. State-wide planning goals include provisions which discourage urban sprawl, support affordable housing, urge protection of the environment, and support provision of adequate urban services. In addition to these requirements, plans must be designed to accommodate 20 year growth forecasts, determined by regional agencies and local jurisdictions, within well defined urban growth areas. COND4UNrrY HISTORY AND PROFILE Physical Setting Renton is a city located at the south end of Lake Washington on the edge of metropolitan and rural King County. It is a city with strong residential neighborhoods, a strong industrial employment base, and a growing commercial/office sector. Its location between Seattle, Bellevue, and Tacoma places Renton in the center of a region that is the economic hub of the State. The City is at the crossroads of a regional transportation network where seven State and Interstate highways converge and is central to national and international air traffic. Renton covers approximately 16 square miles of land and is bordered by King County, Kent, Tukwila, Newcastle and Bellevue with Seattle nearby. The freeway system is a dominant visual feature of this city. Interstate 405 and SR 167 bisect the City, create visual barriers within the community, and define the edges of districts and neighborhoods. It is from this freeway system that many people experience their first impression of the City. It includes portions of the valleys through which the Cedar and Green Rivers flow as well as adjacent uplands to the east and northeast. The natural features that define the edges of the City and its neighborhoods include Lake Washington, the hills, plateaus, stream corridors, and valleys. While development over time has changed the appearance of the community, the natural features have generally remained constant. One exception to this is in the valleys where farmland and wetlands have been converted to other, more intensive uses. This is because these lands are relatively flat and less expensive to develop thus making them more attractive for uses requiring large amounts of land. Much of the development that has occurred in the valleys and the urban area over the last forty years has focused on accommodating the automobile, rather than the pedestrian. Renton has a strong sense of community. Residential areas are typically organized around schools, parks and other institutions. Renton's existing neighborhoods offer a a diverse housing stock ranging in unit type and price. Although it is one of the older cities within the region, Renton still has vacant and underused land in many neighborhoods, including the historic downtown, which offer an opportunity for growth. The plateau areas hold major residential neighborhoods and growth is expected in this area. Abundant views and green wooded areas characterize the hillsides encircling the downtown and along the Cedar River and May Creek. The topography and location of the City afford beautiful scenic views of a variety of significant natural features including Mt. Rainier, the Olympic Mountains, Lake Washington, and the Cascade Mountains. Renton's Past The Duwamish tribe were the earliest known Native American people to live in what is now Renton. The Duwamish had their villages near the Cedar and Black River confluence, the Black River and Lake Washington confluence and the base of Earlington Hill. In 1853 Henry Tobin came upon this area and lay claim to a square half -mile at the Cedar and Black River confluence. Being at the confluence of two rivers near a large lake was thought to be ideal for siting a future city for industrial and commercial growth with navigable transportation nearby. Renton was formally established with the platting of 480 acres of land by Erasmus Smithers in 1856. This original plat comprises much of present downtown Renton. The town grew as local coal deposits were mined. The downtown core, evolved out of the first plat of the town filed in 1876. This plat included the area from the Cedar River south to Seventh Street, between Burnett Street and Mill Avenue. Early industries and businesses included coal mining, lumber, brick making, and rail and freight transportation. Early grocery stores and other family -run stores were located in what is presently downtown Renton. The downtown core was linked to other communities by both the Walla Walla Railroad and the Puget Sound EIectric Railway. In its early days Renton had many stores ranging from drug, hardware and junk, grocery, clothing, home furnishing and banking. In 1901, upon incorporation, the City had a total area of one square mile. Since then, incremental annexations have increased the size of the City to encompass approximately 16.7 square miles. Employment in Renton has been dominated by industry since the City was first settled in the mid 1800's. Because of the nearby forests and proximity to water for transport, the first local industry was timber harvesting and processing. Beginning in the 1870's and continuing through the 1940's, Renton was known for its coal mining and brick making operations. Other industries included production and transport of lumber, and the supply of steel, pig iron, and equipment to railroad companies. During this period, the City established itself as an important industrial center. The Boeing Company's decision in the early 1940s to build a new plant at the south end of Lake Washington dramatically influenced the City's future. Rapid growth of the Boeing Company together with the merger of Pacific Car and Foundry into PACCAR, Inc. accelerated the City's rise as a regional industrial and employment center. Renton was transformed from a small town of 4,500 population to a thriving city with a population of 16,039 in the decade from 1940-1950 with construction of the Boeing Company's Renton plant. The industrial employment center developed at the same locations formerly occupied by extractive industries --perhaps in part because the transportation network to serve these sites was already well established. This became important because the industrial area remained in the heart of the City and was served by a transportation network which converged on the downtown area. With the shift away from rail toward automobile and truck transportation in the 1940s and 1950s, a new type of regional transportation hub was created in Renton. Two major freeways (Interstate 405 and SR 167) and three State highways (SR 900, 515 and 169) augmented and replaced the rail system. This road system was developed to provide a regional network allowing access around Lake Washington to serve the Renton industrial area. During this period, the transportation demand shifted from exporting raw materials to importing a major work force. Renton developed as an independent city with its own downtown area and surrounding neighborhoods. Through a series of annexations, it expanded from one square mile in 1901 to sixteen square miles in 1991. With growth, the City provided more and more urban services to an increasing number of businesses and residents. Renton Today Renton has grown from a small compact town, nestled in the Cedar River and Green River Valleys, to a much larger city which now spreads across the valley floors and into the adjacent hills. Renton's nearest neighbors, Kent and Tukwila, have grown similarly. Once separated by rural areas and open space, Renton and its neighbors are now growing together and becoming part of the larger Puget Sound metropolitan region. Renton is currently home to more than 43,970 (1994 OFM) people and ranks fourth in population in King County. An additional 60,000 people live in the unincorporated area surrounding the City. It is a city with many well -established neighborhoods --as well as some new neighborhoods. Renton continues to be an important center of employment. Over 45,000 people work in the city each day. Most of these people work for the Boeing Company or PACCAR Company, which continue to be major players in the local and regional economy. Renton, historically, has been a small city and in many ways it still resembles a small town. But several factors place it on the threshold of change: the continued vitality of Renton's industrial sector; regional population growth; and its location at the crossroads of local, national, and international traffic. These factors foreshadow a new role for Renton as an important metropolitan center. Renton, along with the rest of the region and the country has been experiencing an increase in professional and service jobs over the past few years. Boeing's related research and development facilities in and around Renton have been a major factor in the development of office parks along Grady and in the north end of the Green River Valley. At the same time, there has been increased demand for goods and services as evidenced by the number and types of commercial uses along Rainier Avenue. As more land is converted to office and commercial use there will be less available for future industrial uses and the type of jobs they provide. The pressures of economic growth and progress have resulted in the construction of office buildings, factories, housing projects, and supporting infrastructure in the City. A. network of freeways, arterials and transmission lines criss-cross Renton and divide the community. Development occurring outside of the City has also affected the character of the community. Regional shopping centers competing with Renton's downtown retail core have resulted in a shift in marketable goods in the downtown from general merchandise to specialty items. This transition has changed the visual character of the downtown as businesses open or relocate. Vacant land remains scattered throughout Renton, but, as time passes, will become an increasingly scarce resource. Some vacant land is environmentally sensitive and not suitable for intensive development. However, based on current estimates, there are approximately 2,250 acres of vacant and developable land in Renton. The largest blocks of vacant land are generally found in Renton's outlying areas. Smaller pockets of vacant land and vacant lots are found in most of the City's existing neighborhoods. The challenge for Renton is to manage growth in a manner which maintains the desirable features of the City while being flexible enough to take advantage of opportunities for change. TRENDS Rapid regional growth has produced development pressure throughout the City. As in many other communities, recent commercial development has shifted away from downtown, and a growing number of retail and office uses are locating along major roadways and within residential neighborhoods. While this increases the convenience to some residents, it also erodes the viability of the downtown, contributes to traffic congestion, intrudes upon neighborhoods and encourages strip commercial development along the major thoroughfares throughout the City and the adjacent unincorporated area. In addition, multi -family development, which is increasing as a percentage of the total housing stock, is frequently clustered around these commercial developments along major arterials. Single Family: Traditionally, single family development has consumed the greatest amount of the City's developable land. However, according to the 1990 Census, in recent years (between 1980-89), the supply of multi -family housing has grown at a fastet'rate than single family housing. Between 1980 and 1990, 5600 housing units were built in Renton: 67 % of these were multi -family units. This has brought the amount of multi -family housing within the city from roughly 40% of the total housing stock in 1980 to 50% in 1990. If current trends continue, the City's total supply of multi -family housing could outpace single family housing in the future. Multi -family Development: Multi -family units in Renton increased at a faster rate than single family units between 1980 and 1990. Single family increased 12 %, mobile homes increased 112 %, 5-9 unit multi -family increased 141 % and 10-49 units multifamily 94%. This growth pattern changed the overall percentage of multi -family housing as a percentage of the housing stock from roughly 40 % in 1980 to 50 % by 1990. Commercial Centers: Continuation of the low intensity, suburban growth pattern will likely result in more commercial shopping areas in the Renton planning area, and expansion of the existing commercial areas along arterials and into surrounding neighborhoods within the City. Evidence of this development pattern can be seen in the Coal Creek area, Benson Hill and Fairwood, and along Sunset and Duvall in Renton. Strip commercial is another common result of low intensity development, especially along principal and major arterial routes; one example is along both sides of Benson Road south of Can/SE 176th. Unfortunately this development pattern carries economic and environmental costs to the entire City. Economically there is a cost for the extra driving required for work and personal trips. In terms of environmental costs there is the declining air quality from automobile emissions and inefficient land use and disruptions to existing neighborhoods. Institutions: The expansion of the Valley Medical Center and related development is expected to continue. Renton Technical College is currently expanding its operations on campus. As both of these institutional uses grow to serve the region, they are expected to expand beyond current boundaries and into surrounding neighborhoods. Industrial: Industrial employment, especially manufacturing, is declining nation-wide. In the Puget Sound region, while the proportion of jobs in the industrial sector is projected to decline, the number of manufacturing jobs in this area is expected to remain relatively stable, at least through the year 2020. In Renton, commercial uses, mainly office and services are increasing as a sector of the employment base. This trend reflects the increased demand for office and service uses which is symptomatic of the regional economy's gradual shift from an industrial base to a service base. However, this trend is not as pro- nounced in Renton as elsewhere for two important reasons. First, according to the 1989 Community Profiil , the City has a large, existing, industrial employment base, and second, it also has a relatively large supply of land in industrial uses (14%). This compares to 7% for commercial use and 24% for residential use. Industrial zoning accounted for 23 % of vacant lands while commercial was 2.8 %, public use 8.4 % and residential 65.5 %. In Renton the most noticeable changes are occurring in the mix and type of industrial activities within the City. Most noticeable is a trend away from heavy industrial/manufacturing toward medium and light industrial uses. Although manufacturing is expected to remain stable and industrial jobs are expected to decline, the number of light and medium industrial jobs in wholesale/transportation/communications/ utilities is projected to nearly double in the Renton area through 2020. A second trend is a blurring of land use category descriptions as technology changes the way work is done and more activities include office and computer components. This change is manifested by an increase in the mixes of uses, either within one company or within one building or complex. For example, many businesses are constellations of light industrial, manufacturing research and development and office uses. Changes are expected to occur in Renton's employment areas incrementally over a long period of time. Some industrial areas will redevelop into other uses but in some cases inappropriate infrastructure or cleanup of contaminants on the site may limit redevelopment. In other cases viable industrial uses exist on a site and will operate for several years but property owners anticipate a change in use over the long term. For example, both the Stoneway and Barbee Mill sites have submitted proposals for future projects mixing office and residential uses. Although the rate of change in industrial lands is slow it is significant because if too much land is converted to non industrial uses, it could have a detrimental effect on retaining the industrial base. The office and service sector is expanding in terms of both overall acreage and intensity of use. New mid - rise office development of 4-6 stories is spreading south and north of the downtown in areas previously zoned industrial. Commercial retail and service areas outside of the downtown are gradually sprawling along major arterials. In these areas the trend is toward continuation of low rise automobile oriented commercial developments. In many cases these developments compete with businesses in downtown Renton. In several areas of the City light industrial developments which were displaced by higher intensity uses in the downtown core/north Valley, or need older structures or cheaper land, are locating along the City's arterials. Office Development: Office development is currently occurring or proposed in and around downtown Renton in the Green River Valley, North Renton, and Kennydale. Development pressure for new office construction is expected to continue in Renton due to the existing large employment base, availability of land and the relatively good freeway access. Improved transit service in the areas is expected to enhance this trend. Schools: Multiple use of school facilities has been a trend that will likely continue. Renton School District enrollment has been declining overall since its peak in 1970. While enrollment has declined by 24 % since 1970, the rate of decline has slowed from 15 % during the 1970's to 10 % during the 1980's. Enrollment is down slightly from 1990 figures but overall it is relatively stable. Long term projections anticipate larger enrollments and an increased need for facilities in the district based on increased birth rates for the population in general. Religious Centers: The trend over the past decade or so has been for religious groups to provide more services to their members and the public at large. These services require additional land and facilities for schools, gymnasiums, offices, parking, expanded hours of worship and social services. As a result these facilities are having a greater impact on adjacent neighborhoods and the existing infrastructure. Open Space: Renton is developing an ambitious open space acquisition program within the Department of Community Services. The program's main goals are to preserve, protect, and enhance the natural areas in an urban environment and to afford public access to these areas with limited development and disturbances. Many of the sites will remain relatively undisturbed, while wildlife and habitat areas that are less fragile will be more developed with park and recreation facilities and allow greater public access. As the City of Renton grew, many of those portions of the City which have natural hazardous features were passed over for land more easily developed. Now, however, with the amount of easily developable land diminishing, the critical areas are becoming more attractive for urban uses. Annexation: The City has historically undertaken annexation in response to requests from local property owners. For many years most annexations were of small areas which were already urbanized. Future trends are likely to be three types of annexations: 1) annexation of larger undeveloped parcels within the urban designated area; 2) annexation of smaller infill parcels within urban area which are developed at urban densities, but lack urban levels of services such as sewer; and 3) annexation of commercial and/or residential neighborhoods within the urban designated area which already developed in King County. Traffic: There is one solid traffic trend within the region: traffic is increasing. A variety of reasons explain this increase: the growth in population, jobs and housing; more people are now commuting within the region; the location of employment and housing impacts the length and variety of trips made; new housing development is occurring on vacant land in outlying parts of the metropolitan area rather than on land closer to traditional urban centers; and employment areas are relocating to suburban areas. The general increase in standard of living in the region also generates more traffic because, as the standard of living goes up, car ownership increases and so does trip making. In addition, the average length of trips is also increasing. The cumulative effect of all of these factors is more cars on the road and greater traffic congestion. Current traffic improvement projects and programs undertaken by the City's Transportation Division include realignment of the S-Curves and the addition of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to Interstate 405, completion of Oakesdale Avenue S.W., the widening of Grady Way, development and implementation of the North Renton Transportation Plan, and establishment of a system of truck routes. The City is also presently working on expansion of its system of pedestrian and bicycle trails. Airport: The airport is already a heavily used facility and demand on the airport continues to steadily grow. This growth is primarily due to the closure of other general aviation airports in the region such as those which were at Bellevue and Kent. It is also partially due to the increases in production at the Boeing plant. In addition there is increased demand for seaplane activity at the seaplane base due to closure of seaplane facilities elsewhere in the region. Public Facilities: There is no one trend which can be used to describe these various facilities. For ex- ample, some municipal facilities may become more decentralized in the future while others could do the opposite. Library facilities, at least for the remainder of this decade, are not expected to decentralize. Expectations are that the main facility downtown and the Highlands branch will continue to serve the needs of the community. Most municipal administrative functions are also expected to remain centralized with the development of a new municipal complex in the downtown. Fire Services: Fire services by their nature must be decentralized in order to provide adequate protection for the entire City. As the City grows in population and land area, additional fire stations will be needed for new and currently under -served areas. The Fire Department Master Plan (March 1987) cites the Kennydale and Tiffany Park neighborhoods and the Green River Valley industrial area as having level of service deficiencies due to the response time to those areas. In addition, it states, "If annexations occur in the East Kennydale, Sierra Heights, and East Duvall Avenue communities and in the Cedar River corridor, they will have substandard fire protection based on the five -in five standard and current station locations. " The "five -in -five" standard is the department's desired level of service; to have five fire fighters on the scene five minutes after receiving the call. Downtown: The Downtown Renton Association is leading an effort to change the gradual decline in the downtown shopping area. Downtown merchants are working with the City to implement a redevelopment concept for the downtown emphasizing mixed use development, including residential uses, and supporting additional street amenities and parking improvements. Although this effort is too new to show many results, several new developments are in process including a multi -story senior housing complex. Environment: In addition, the development within the City's sphere of influence and within the City itself has contributed to some environmental changes. Because of the increase in impervious surfaces and land clearing, run-off has increased, and consequently flooding has also increased in downstream areas. Streams and rivers have experienced increased siltation from erosion resulting in flooding and delta formations. While no seismic events of any magnitude have occurred, those areas of Renton with higher seismic risks than others could be affected in the future. Additional inappropriate development in these areas could pose a public safety risk in future seismic events. The historical coal mines of the area were not fully documented and many abandoned mine shafts exist in areas which will likely be used for urban growth. Finally, each year the City has landslides which threaten private property, and impede roads and utilities. Urban growth will probably continue to spread into the remaining rural areas and open space that now separates Renton from adjacent urban areas. As Renton's downtown grows, it is likely to remain as a relatively low -profile urban center. Destination -oriented specialty shopping will draw patrons from the local and regional area. Currently, the City is working in cooperation with the Downtown Renton Association to improve the urban design of the area. Commercial and industrial development within Renton will continue to be primarily auto -oriented and dominated by large surface parking lots. On a city- wide basis, only modest improvements are likely to be seen in the pedestrian environment. Renton's residential areas will form loosely defined neighborhoods consisting primarily of a collection of housing developments. GROWTH PROJECTIONS During the last part of the 1980s there was an increase in the population of Renton and the unincorporated area surrounding the City. The number of work places within the City has also increased. As a result of this growth, vacant land was converted to development. Vacant land not in public ownership or protected by land use regulation is rapidly disappearing as the City matures. In addition, the value of the remaining open land is increasing. Population In 1990, the population of the Renton planning area was estimated at 101,600. This area includes the City of Renton as well as unincorporated urban areas surrounding the city including portions of Skyway, the East Renton Plateau and North Soos Creek. Of the total Renton planning area population, 43,970 (1994 OFIvI) people lived within the City of Renton and roughly 60,000 people lived in the currently unincorporated portions of the planning area. Employment In 1990 estimates showed approximately 59,656 employees working within the Renton planning area; about 53,851 (86 %) of these employees worked within the City of Renton. By the year 2010, employment in the Renton planning area is forecast to increase by an additional 32,218 jobs. Approximately 27,300 of these new jobs (85 %) would be located within current city boundaries. Because Renton's urban center is almost at build -out in terms of total jobs, most of the employment growth would happen in Employment Areas outside of the Urban Center mainly located within the Green River Valley. Preliminary King County employment growth targets would ask the City of Renton to accommodate fewer jobs than growth forecasts because the Countywide Planning Policies direct job growth from non -urban center areas into urban centers. Because Renton's urban center is almost built out and cannot accommodate a significant amount of employment growth, this approach would direct job growth from non -urban center areas in Renton into urban centers which have not yet approached build out. Preliminary growth targets would ask Renton to plan for roughly 4,000 fewer jobs than growth forecasts. Preliminary growth targets for the unincorporated portions of Renton's planning area have not yet been proposed by King County. Both the growth forecasts and growth targets, however, indicate substantial employment growth within the Renton planning area over the next 20 years. This significant growth in employment will create a strong - associated demand for housing growth within the Renton area. m Amended 12/08/97 Household The City is planning for a twenty year period of growth. In 1990, the City of Renton had a total population of41,395 persons. With the 60,198 people residing in the annexation area, the total population for the Planning Area (city plus annexation area) in 1990 was 101,593. This translates to 18,031 households in the City, 22,392 households in the annexation area, or a total of 40,423 households in the Planning Area in 1990. Expected increases in population will result in 57,409 persons (or 25,956 households) living within the current city limits by the year 2010; and, 77,752 persons (or 29,128 households) in the annexation area. The total forecasted population of Renton's Planning Area is expected to be 135,161 persons (or 55,084 households) by 2010. RENTON IN THE FUTURE: A VISION The Land Use policies shape the growth of Renton in ways that help retain the economic 71tality, environmental quality, and character of the community. These policies describ/s7tron and positive vision of the future for Renton.City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. d view the results of these policies after 20 years, we would find a new kind of city in Renton. Thuld continue to be a major regional employment center and have a thriving industrial and manufactor. But the City would also grow as an important center for commerce, residential uses, and cultties. Its downtown area would be more active over a longer period and the its charactermore urban. The Downtown Renton Association's vision is to achieve a mix of uses in do ntown to include residential, commercial, light industrial, retail, public services, entertainment, recreatio and youth activities. Residential units would be available in a wide variety of types from sing] amily homes, townhouses, and high density apartments. They would be located in both the downtown d adjacent neighborhoods, and at prices that will accommodate everyone from subsidized low income pie to up -scale professionals. New and refurbished office space would house an expanding commercial for providing business and professional services to local residents and our significant industria ase. The prestige address for both residential and commercial uses would be in the high amenity co dor along the Cedar River adjacent to downtown. Downtown would also have a healthy contingent of inde goods and services, each within a specific market niche. more localized market. The types of retail activities wol personalized than anything you would be likely to find a a new and expanded municipal administrative and law City. The municipal center would be located in the v' it residents. :nd nt specialty retailers offering a broad range of er retailers would offer consumer goods to a be more diverse and the services more contemporary mall. Government would occupy justice center to serve the growing needs of the y of downtown for easy access by all city Native sons and daughters returning to their ho town will be surprised at the diversity of specialty restaurants and entertainment opportunities av Table in the "new" downtown. Meeting rooms and conference spaces are plentiful, particularly ' the several new hotels which have chosen to locate in downtown. The more up -scale hotels take dvantage of their Cedar River locations, their proximity to the Community Center, and the City's trail sy tem, which is now more fully integrated with the county -wide network. The returnees will also be pie ed to find that mobility has been much improved in downtown. The shuttle system of vans and mini- sses conveniently links downtown, the Valley Industrial Area, Renton Village, Renton Center, the ighlands, Fairwood and Benson Centers, and North Renton. 12 AMENDMENT 2005-T-2 —UTILITIES ELEMENT REVISIONS ISSUE SUMMARY: Although staff updated the goals and policies in the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan for the 2004 update, the information pertaining to private utility purveyors was not updated. It is necessary to review the information on private utility purveyors in the Comprehensive Plan and recommend areas for amendment. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Remove all maps and related text that reveal the specific locations of utility infrastructure and facilities, either existing or proposed. ANALYSIS: The Growth Management Act requires the City to provide a Utilities Element containing the general location and capacity of existing and proposed utilities. Review of the Utilities Element of the Comprehensive Plan shows that although the goals and policies were amended as part of the 2004 update, the maps with information about the private utility purveyors was not updated. Update of the private purveyor information has proven to be challenging. When the original Element was written, utility providers freely shared information with the City. However, private purveyors are now unwilling to provide information due to heightened security concerns after September 1 lth. Increased competition has produced frequent changes in the administration of private utilities as companies are acquired, merged, or split. As a result, companies consider a greater volume of information as proprietary than ever before. Amending the Element requires a slightly different approach than used in the past. If purveyors were freely willing to provide information, updating the information in the Utility Element would be as simple as replacing the old maps with new. Review of several other surrounding jurisdictions shows that few municipalities have approached their Utility Element updates in this manner. General information about the location of utility infrastructure and facilities is provided along with information about current service areas and levels of service. Text demonstrates the ability of future service to serve forecasted growth by discussing how the utility responds to new requests for service, general plans for expansion of the utility, and any regulations that affect the provision of service. Maps are rarely used, if at all, to show specific locations or proposed expansions. Renton's Comprehensive Plan text already contains the necessary information to fulfill the GMA mandate to provide general location and capacity information for existing and proposed utilities. Text clearly demonstrates that public and private purveyors will be able to accommodate forecasted growth. Removal of the outdated map information and related text references will complete the update of Renton's Utilities Element. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-02OG (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 1 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2005\2005 map amendments\Utilities Element\Utilities Issue.doc } r. 1► � AMENDMENT 2005-T-2- Utilties Element Revisions 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The proposed amendment is within the vision embodied by the Comprehensive Plan and eliminates outdated information. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The recommended changes comply with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. CONCLUSION: Removal of the utility location maps removes potentially outdated information from the Comprehensive Plan related to private utility purveyors. This action is consistent with the trend amongst neighboring jurisdictions to remove such information. Page 2 of 2 Summary: The Utilities Element guides future utility service within the greater Renton area. It helps ensure that adequate utilities will be available to both existing and new development. It also ensures that utility improvements will be used to help implement the Comprehensive Plan and will be phased according to community priorities. The Utilities Element indicates how utility improvements can be used to maintain equitable levels of service, guarantee public health and safety, and serve new development in a timely manner. In addition, the Utilities Element defines how to minimize the detrimental impacts of utility improvements on surrounding development as well as the community as a whole. The Utilities Elements looks to promote efficiency in the provision or improvement of service wherever appropriate and feasible. In addition, it asks that the costs of improvements should be distributed in an equitable manner. Beyond the Ceity's existing boundaries, the Utilities Element fosters coordination with regional and adjacent utility systems. It also guides the provision of services to areas outside of the City, but within the City's planning area especially in cases of annexation. The City of Renton provides water, wastewater, and storm water utility services for citizens residing within the city limits and by agreement with other purveyors for some areas located outside of the City's boundaries. Renton contracts with a private hauler for collection of solid waste and residential recycling. Other utility services that affect the City and are dic: scea ithi : this Draftee' a u t include: cable television, conventional telephone, fiber optic cable systems, cellular telephone service, natural gas, petroleum products, and electricity. (See the Annexation Section of the Land Use Element, the Stormwater Section of the Environmental Element and the Capital Facilities Element for additional policies related to the Utilities Element) General Policies Discussion: The following general policies are designed to ensure that utility services are safely and efficiently provided, and are constructed in an environmentally sound manner that reasonably mitigates impacts on adjacent land uses. The policies also emphasize cooperation and coordination with other agencies, jurisdictions, and purveyors to create and maintain utilities. Objective U-A: Provide an adequate level of public utilities in response to and consistent with land use, protection of the environment, and annexation goals and policies. Policy U-1. Utility facilities and services should be consistent with the growth and development concepts directed by the Comprehensive Plan. Policy U-2. Promote the collocation of new public and private utility distribution lines with planned or pre-existing systems (both above and below ground) in joint trenches and/or right-of-ways where environmentally, technically, economically, and legally feasible. Policy U-3. Process permits and approvals for utilities and facilities in a fair and timely manner and in accord with development regulations that encourage predictability. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 3 of 46 Policy U-4. Strive to protect the health and safety of Renton citizens from recognized harmful effects of utility generated environmental hazards. Policy U-5. Encourage the appropriate siting, construction, operation, and decommissioning of all utility systems in a manner that reasonably minimizes impacts on adjacent land uses. Policy U-6. Where appropriate, encourage conservation in coordination with other utilities and jurisdictions. Policy U-7. Continue to encourage the coordination of non -emergency utility trenching activities and street repair to reduce impacts on mobility, aesthetics, noise, and other disruptions. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 25 of 46 Regional Solid Waste Purveyors within the City Limits The King County Solid Waste Division owns and operates the Renton Transfer Station in the 3000 block of NE 4th Street in the Renton Highlands neighborhood. Local waste haulers and residents of unincorporated King County who haul their own waste use this facility. City residents also use this facility for disposal of large and bulky items. Due to state legislation and Washington Utilities and Trade Commission (WUTC) regulations, the City does not have the authority to contract exclusively for collection of recyclable materials generated by businesses. However, a number of private companies do collect recyclables from businesses in Renton. Location and Capacity of Existing Solid Waste Facilities Figure 5 1 illustrates the leeation of the trmsfer siation, landfill, and eonstruotien, demolition, and land ele (CDL) t-ansf ,. f ^:W There are three existing solid waste facilities within the City's Planning Area. a King County Transfer Station, the Cedar Hills Landfill and the Black River Construction Demolition and Land Clearing Transfer Station (CDL). King County's Renton Transfer Station is located in the Renton Highlands. A majority of the solid waste generated in Renton is transported there by the City's contractor, Waste Management, Inc. A majority of the vehicles that utilize the Transfer Station are garbage trucks from waste hauling companies. Regional Disposal's Black River Transfer and Recycling Center (a Rabanco facility), located at 501 Monster Road SW, opened in late 1993. Under a contract with King County, this facility accepts construction, demolition, and land clearing waste. The facility received 89,300 tons of CDL material in 1999. There is no data on the amount of CDL processed at construction sites and hauled directly to a processor. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the amount of CDL waste being diverted from the facility. The City of Renton recognizes that the Mt. Olivet Landfill (closed 1991) was not closed in accordance with State of Washington closure standards. Areas of deficiency include excessively steep slopes, lack of adequate capping, possible negative environmental consequences, failure to obtain an approved closure plan, and other related deficiencies. The City continues to monitor groundwater quality in the vicinity of the landfill to assure that potential contaminants do not enter the City's drinking water aquifer. If contamination is detected, the City has contingency measures to address this problem, such as selective operation of the City's eight wells and groundwater pumping to remove contaminants. Identified areas of contamination would be monitored until the contaminants are removed. King County's Cedar Hills Landfill, owned and operated by the King County Solid Waste Division, and located southeast of Renton, will continue to receive all solid waste generated in the City of Renton. This facility's remaining permitted capacity is approximately 12.5 million tons (as of January 2000). At the current level of fifty percent (50%) waste reduction and recycling, Cedar Hills will be able to accept solid waste until 2012. Recyclables collected from single family, duplex, and multi -family residents in the City are taken to Waste Management, Inc.'s Cascade Recycling Center in Woodinville, WA. Yard waste for single-family and duplex residents in the City is currently taken to Cedar Grove Recycling in Maple Valley. Their yearly capacity is 195,000 tons of organic material. Currently, the facility handles approximately 172,000 tons annually. Cedar Grove is permitted by the Seattle -King County Health Department to have 250,000 cubic yards of organic material onsite. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 26 of 46 capacity transmission lines also allow inter -regional and international power transfers to compensate for seasonal, region -wide variations in generation and demand. BPA owns and operates most of the major transmission lines and substations located throughout the Pacific Northwest. The agency sells transmission services on the high capacity grid to customers throughout the region. Additionally, BPA markets electricity generated by federal hydroelectric projects and the Washington Public Power Supply System. Puget Sound energy, Seattle City Light, and other utilities purchase power and transmission services from BPA as local situations warrant. Electricity is retailed to customers in the Renton Planning Area by Puget Sound Energy and, to a lesser extent, by Seattle City Light. For both utilities, the primary generation facilities are located outside their service areas Puget Sound Energy supplements these sources with power generated and/or purchased within its greater service area. Each utility schedules electrical generation to meet anticipated local demand loads with excess production sold elsewhere on the power grid. Existing Utility Service Area Puget Sound Energy is the principal provider of electrical service within the Renton city limits, as well as most of the remainder of the Renton Planning Area. Electricity is provided to the Bryn Mawr and Skyway portions of the Renton Planning Area by SCL. histo6eal eir-eumstanee, Seattle also serves 10 eustomer-s within the Renton city limits. Currently, SCL and — Puget Sound Enerty afe negotiating an agreement to tfmsfer- the facilities within the City of Renton to T,;-,.,..:,.-.-...l...t. t-------'`--------'I t_.._ InnA _. 1-----''--` General Location of Facilities Electrical facilities can generally be divided into generation, transmission, and distribution functions. Transmission lines are identified by voltages of 115 kilovolt (kV) and above, distribution facilities have less than 55,000 volts (55 kV), and a distribution substation transforms voltages of 115 kV or greater to feeder circuits at lower voltages of 12 or 34 kV. Within the Planning Area, BPA operates transmission facilities, Seattle City Light operates transmission and distribution facilities, and Puget Sound Energy engages in all three functions. Figure 6 1 illustfates existing and proposed eleetfieal substations and other- tFa tem faeilities within the PlanningArea. cu: . Renton's geographic position offers a logical location for transmission routes. Five BPA transmission circuits follow the Rocky Reach -Maple Valley right-of-way, which enters the Planning Area from the east, just south of the Cedar River, and terminates at BPA's Maple Valley Substation. The lines, two 500 kV, one 345 kV, and two 230 kV, originate at BPA facilities north, south, and east of Renton. As electrical service provider to most of the Planning Area, Puget Sound Energy builds, maintains and/or operates various facilities. These include high voltage transmission lines for bulk power transfers, substations for system monitoring and control and changing of voltage levels, and lower voltage feeder lines to carry the electricity to the consumers. The high capacity lines energized at 230 kV and 115 kV feed out from the Talbot Hill Station, which receives power from the adjacent BPA Maple Valley Station. From Talbot Hill these lines carry power to other transmission stations or to distribution substations where the voltage is stepped down for entry into the feeder system. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 30 of 46 Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 31 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01 /04 Natural Gas And Fuel Pipelines Existing Conditions - Natural Gas Background Natural gas is a mixture of hydrocarbon and non -hydrocarbon gases extracted from porous rock formations below the earth's surface. The gas makes its way from the producing fields via the interstate pipeline at high- pressures, often over one thousand pounds per square inch (psi). Colorless and odorless as it comes off the interstate pipeline, a powerful odorant, typically mercaptan, is added for safety purposes to make leaks easier to detect. Through a series of reduction valves, the gas is delivered to homes at pressures of from 0.25 to 2 psi. In recent decades, the residential popularity of natural gas has risen. Cleaner burning and less expensive than the alternatives, oil and electricity, it has become the fuel of choice in many households for cooking, drying clothes, and heating home and water. Natural Gas Utility Service Area Puget Sound Energy (fefinerly Puget Sound E)provides natural gas service to approximately 650,000 customers in the Puget Sound Region, including Renton and its Urban Growth Area. General Location of Natural Gas Facilities Puget Sound Energy operates under a franchise agreement with the City of Renton, which allows PSE to locate facilities within the public street right-of-ways. The gas distribution system consists of a network of high-pressure mains and distribution lines that convey natural gas throughout the Planning Area. Natural gas is provided to PSE by the Northwest Pipeline Corporation, which operates a system extending from Canada to New Mexico. Two parallel Northwest Pipeline Corporation high-pressure mains enter the Planning Area south of Lake McDonald and terminate at the South Seattle Gate Station -le atea at Talbot Read a South 22 a 8 (s o F e7 1 )PSE high-pressure ^ VL 1lVUCT l.,e �..r mains then extend to smaller lines branching -off from the primary supply mains. Through a series of smaller lines and pressure regulators the gas is delivered to consumers. PSE also operates an underground propane storage facility. Capacity of Natural Gas Facilities Although PSE serves most of Renton and its Urban Growth Area, a portion of the Planning Area, west of the Renton Municipal Airport, and straddling SR-900 is currently not served by Puget Sound Energy#efeF-to Figure 7 1). Provision of natural gas service to this area would only require extension of intermediate service lines. The capacity of the system is primarily constrained by the volume of gas entering the PSE network from the Northwest Pipeline Corporation mains. Current capacity of the South Seattle Gate Station, the point of entry for natural gas to the area, is nine million standard cubic feet per hour (scfh). This can serve approximately 180,000 residential customers. The minimum pressure at which gas can be delivered is fifteen pounds per square inch (15 psi). Methods for increasing supply to a particular area include replacement of the lines, looping, installing parallel lines, and inserting higher -pressure lines into greater diameter, but lower pressure mains. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 34 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01 /04 A reserve of natural gas supply is maintained in order to respond to temporary shortfalls in the natural gas supply due to weather -driven higher demand or supply interruptions. A number of separate utilities share the facility, however, and hence it is not dedicated to the Renton Planning Area. Natural Gas System Reliability Since natural gas is chiefly used as a home heating fuel, demand rises as the outdoor temperature drops. The locally available gas supply and the capacity of PSE's delivery system may not always be sufficient to provide product to all customers during periods of exceptional demand. Therefore, PSE has several short term, load - balancing strategies. As stated previously, PSE operates a storage facility that provides a reserve of additional gas for times of shortfall. Also, some gas customers are served under an interruptible service contract. For those times when gas resources become limited, these connections can be temporarily dropped from the system. Residential customers are always granted first priority for available gas supply. Another strategy to maintain system pressure is the looping of mains. Feeding product from both ends of a pipeline decreases the possibility of localized pressure drops and increases system reliability. Forecasted Conditions Puget Sound Energy predicts a growth rate of 41.2% in demand for this 20-year planning horizon. According to this assumption, demand for gas will average 1,227,562.6 cubic feet per hour for December 2010 within the Renton Planning Area. PSE has stated that they will be able to accommodate this increased demand. This will be accomplished through an upgrade of the South Seattle Gate Station to allow the entry of an additional two million scfh into the system, for a total capacity of eleven million scfh. The backfeed from Covington will add another three million scfh and, with the current peak hour feed of one million scfh from Issaquah, there will be sufficient supply capacity to serve the customer base anticipated for 2010. Proposed New or Improved Facilities F°gme 7 ' shows t There is one proposed -high pressure main proposed fequff-td to meet the increased gas demand, which should result from the forecast growth. The ultimate placement of the line will be based on right-of-way permitting, environmental standards, coordination with other utilities, and existing infrastructure placement. PSE has a policy to expand the supply system to serve additional customers. Gas connections are initiated by customer requests. Maximum capacity of the existing distribution system can be increased by the following methods: increasing distribution and supply pressures in existing lines, installing parallel mains, replacing existing with larger sized mains, looping mains, and adding district regulators from supply mains to provide additional intermediate pressure gas sources. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 35 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01 /04 Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 36 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 1 1 /01 /04 Petroleum Fuel Pipelines Existing Conditions Utility Service Area Olympic Pipeline Company is a joint -interest company that provides a variety of fuel oil products via a system of pipelines throughout the region. The stock is held by Atlantic Richfield Corporation (Arco), Shell, and Texaco oil companies. Olympic transports oil products from the Ferndale British Petroleum (BP) refinery, the Cherry Point Arco refinery, and the Anacortes Shell and Texaco refineries through Renton to Seattle, Sea-Tac International Airport, and points south to Portland, Oregon. Olympic's Renton facilities function as a regional distribution hub, as well as supplying the local market with petroleum products. General Location of Fuel Product Pipelines and Other Facilities The Olympic Pipeline Company's facilities in the Renton Planning Area include a system of pipes, varying from 12 to 20 inches in diameter, and a central monitoring station at-244-9-Lind Avenue SW. Petroleum products enter Renton via two pipes from the City's northern border, and then extend south and west to the Renton Station. From here, a 12-inch main heads north, eventually intercepting the City of Seattle Skagit Transmission Line right-of-way toward Seattle. Two parallel branches also extend westward to the Green River, at which point one line heads west to Sea-Tac Airport and one turns south to serve Tacoma and beyond. Fib-7-2 Station.shows the pipelines within the Renton Planning Area as well as Olympic's Renton Renton Station is the monitoring and control center for the entire pipeline network. Here, also, oil products are transferred to trucks for distribution. Capacity of Fuel Product Pipelines and Facilities The Olympic Pipeline Company currently carries an average of approximately 270,000 barrels of product per day, varying according to the transported material. The absolute capacity of the system is over 350,000 barrels. As the primary supplier of petroleum products to Western Washington, Olympic states that system capacity is sufficient to meet current demand. Forecasted Conditions Olympic, though not directly serving City of Renton, affirms that they can and will increase the capacity of the system to accommodate a demand commensurate with the expected population and land uses anticipated by 2020 in the Renton Planning Area. Aside from laying new pipelines, options for increasing capacity include introducing drag reducing agents to the petroleum products, increasing the horsepower of the pumps, and replacing individual sections of pipe where bottlenecks tend to occur. Objective U-I: Promote the safe transport and delivery of natural gas and other fuels within the Planning Area. Policy U-96. Coordinate with local and regional purveyors of natural gas for the siting of transmission lines, distribution lines, and other facilities within the Renton Planning Area. Policy U-97. Support cost effective public programs aimed at energy conservation, efficiency, and supplementing of natural gas supplies through new technology. Policy U-98. Allow for the extension of natural gas distribution lines to and within the city limits and Urban Growth Area, provided they are consistent with development envisioned in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 37 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11/01/04 Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 38 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01/04 Policy U-99. Require that petroleum product pipelines are operated and maintained in such a manner that protects public safety, especially where Telecommunications those facilities are located in the Aquifer Protection Area. Telecommunications: Conventional Telephone, Fiber Optic Cable, Cellular Telephone, and Cable Television Utility Service Area - Conventional Telephone Service to Renton and its Planning Area is provided by Qwest Communications, Inc (formerly US West). Qwest is an investor -owned corporation, whose holdings include companies serving regional, national, and international markets, including telephone services to 25 million customers in 14 western states. The subsidiaries include directory publishing, cellular mobile communications and paging, personal communications networks, cable television, business communications systems sales and service, communications software, and financial services. All cities within the State of Washington fall within a particular Local Access and Transport Area (LATA). These LATAs are telephone exchange areas that define the area in which Qwest is permitted to transport telecommunications traffic. There are 94 exchanges within Washington where Qwest provides dial tone and other local services to customers. General Location of Conventional Telephone Facilities Telephone service systems within Renton and its Planning Area include switching stations, trunk lines, and distribution lines. Switching stations, also called "Central Offices" (COs), switch calls within and between line exchange groupings. These groupings are addressed uniquely by an area code and the first three digits of a telephone number. Each line grouping can carry up to 10,000 numbers. Renton has 14 of these groupings. The CO serving Renton is loeated in a building on 3rd Avenue South within devmteAm Renton. Four main "feeder" cable routes generally extend from each CO, heading to the north, south, east, and west T_ Connected to these main feeder routes are branch feeder routes. The branch feeder routes connect with thousands of local loops that provide dial tone to every subscriber. These facilities may be aerial or buried, copper or fiber. Local loops can be used for voice or data transmission (such as facsimile machines or computer modems). A variety of technologies are utilized including electronics, digital transmission, fiber optics, and other means to provide multiple voice/data paths over a single wire. Methods of construction are determined by costs and local regulations. Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 39 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01 /04 Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 40 of 46 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 11 /01 /04 Utilities Element Redline.doc Page 44 of 46 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: - e SUBMITTING DATA: FOR AGENDA OF: 06/13/05 Dept/Div .... Human Resources & Risk Mgmt Staff Contact ........... Michael Webby (x-7650) AGENDA STATUS: Consent ................. X SUBJECT: Public Hearing..... Group Health Cooperative Medical Coverage Agreement Correspondence... Annual renewal. ( Ordinance........... Resolution ............. Old Business....... EXHIBITS: New Business....... Study Session........ Contract Revisions Other ..................... RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVALS: Legal Dept............ X Refer to Finance Committee Finance Dept........ Other .................. X FISCAL IMPACT: None SUMMARY OF ACTION: Transfer/Amendment.... Revenue Generated....... Request approval for annual renewal of Group Health Contract Contract No. 0390400 for active LEOFF 1 Employees, Contract No. 0057500 and Contract 4057500 for LEOFF 1 Retirees, and Contract No. 1162600 for all active employees. Funding has been previously approved by Council in the 2005 Budget. The revisions are applicable to all four of the renewal contracts. As in prior years Group Health does not send confirming contracts for signature until mid year. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed and approved the 2005 contracts. Complete copies of the contract are available for review. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the annual Group Health Cooperative Medical contracts. GROUP HEALTH COOPERATIVE CONTRACT REVISIONS Effective January 1, 2005 (Created 05/28/04) This is the most current list of revisions, but this list is subject to change at any time. CONTRACT LANGUAC,EBENEFIT CHANGE EXPLANATION Some minor changes to language have been General Information made for consistency across our family of plans. The benefit period allowance under Allowances Schedule chemical dependency services has been increased in accordance with Washington state law. The dollar amount will be reflected in the Agreement. Bariatric surgery is no longer covered under the basic contract. The organ transplant benefit in the basic contract has been changed to include donor costs of up to $50,000 as part of the $200,000 lifetime benefit maximum. Rehabilitation services in the basic contract have been changed to delete the reference to "per condition". Dependents are now covered up to the age of Eligibility and Enrollment 25 in the standard contract, and student ages have been deleted. This change has been made because GHC does not verify student status since the group is responsible for determining student eligibility. GHC has revised the name of the medicare Eligibility for Medicare plans from "Medicare+Choice" to "Medicare Advantage". Pre -Existing Condition A clarification has been made to state that "Once Pre -Existing Condition wait periods, if any, have been met, Pre -Existing Conditions are covered in the same manner as any other illness." A clarification has been made to reflect that Tobacco Cessation "one course of nicotine replacement therapy is covered provided the member is actively GHC (05/28/04) GroupHealth COOPERATIVE Group Health Plan Summary of Benefits Renton, City of - Leoff I Retirees Effective Date 1/1/2005 Ref 0500575001 This is a brief summary of benefits and limitations. THIS IS NOT A CONTRACT. For a more detailed description of your benefits and exclusions, refer to your certificate of coverage or contact your employer or benefits administrator. Annual Deductible No annual deductible. Plan Coinsurance No plan coinsurance. ' Lifetime Maximum No lifetime maximum. Hospital Services Covered inpatient medical and surgical Covered in full. services, including acute chemical withdrawal (detoxification) Covered outpatient hospital surgery (including ambulatory surgical centers) Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Outpatient Services (Office Visits) Covered outpatient medical and surgical $25 copayment per Member per visit. services Allergy testing Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Oncology (radiation therapy, chemotherapy) Drugs — Outpatient (including mental health drugs, contraceptive drugs and devices and diabetic supplies) Prescription drugs, medicines, supplies and Covered subject to the lesser of GHC's charge or a $10 devices for a supply of thirty (30) days or less copayment. when listed in the GHC drug formulary Over-the-counter drugs and medicines Not covered. Allergy serum Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply. Injectables Injections that can be self-administered are applicable subject to the prescription drug cost share. Mail order drugs and medicines Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less. Growth hormones Covered in full subject to a twelve (12) month waiting period. Except as otherwise noted, total out-of-pocket expenses for the following Covered Services are included in the out-of-pocket limit: • Inpatient Services • Outpatient Services Out -of -Pocket Limit (Stop Loss) Emergency Services at a GHC or non-GHC Facility • Ambulance Services Limited to an aggregate maximum of $2,000 per Member and $4,000 per family per calendar year. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of five (5) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Acupuncture subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Summary of Benefits Page 3 of 4 Maternity and Pregnancy Services Delivery and associated hospital care Covered subject to the applicable inpatient services copayment. Routine prenatal and postpartum care Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered at 80% for up to twelve (12) days per Member per Mental Health Services calendar year at a GHC-approved mental health care facility when Inpatient Services authorized in advance by GHC. Coinsurance does not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Covered subject to a $20 copayment per individual session and a Outpatient Services $10 copayment per Member per group session for up to twenty (20) visits per Member per calendar year. Copayments do not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of two (2) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Naturopathy subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment once every Optical Services twelve (12) months. Eye examinations, including contact lens Routine eye examinations examinations, for eye pathology are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment as often as Medically Necessary. Lenses, including contact lenses, and frames Eyeglass lenses and frames; or contact lenses, including exams associated with their fitting covered up to $100 per Member per any consecutive twenty-four (24) month period. Contact lenses following cataract surgery, when in lieu of an intraocular lens, are covered in full provided the Member has been continuously covered by GHC since such surgery. Contact lenses for eye pathology are covered in full. Replacement of these lenses are covered once within a twelve (12) month period and only when needed due to a change in the Member's medical condition. Covered up to a lifetime maximum of $200,000 (including donor costs up to $50,000), subject to applicable copayments. Coverage Organ Transplants for all transplants, including follow-up care, is excluded until the Member has been continuously covered under a GHC or Group Health Options (GHO) plan for twelve (12) months. Pre -Existing Condition Covered subject to the applicable cost share, with no wait. Preventive Services (Well Adult and Well Child Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment when in accordance with the well -care schedule established by GHC. Physicals, Immunizations, Pap Smears, Excluded are physicals for travel, employment, insurance, license, Mammograms) etc. Rehabilitation Services Inpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services Covered up to sixty (60) days per calendar year, subject to the combined, including services for inpatient copayment. neurodevelopmentally disabled children age six (6) and under Outpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services combined, including services for Covered up to sixty (60) visits per calendar year, subject to the neurodevelopmentally disabled children age outpatient services copayment. six (6) and under Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Covered in full up to a maximum of sixty (60) days per Member per calendar year. Sterilization (Vasectomy, Tubal Ligation) Not covered. Procedures to reverse a sterilization are not covered. 0500575001.doc Summary of Benefits Page 4 of 4 Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Services Inpatient and Outpatient TMJ Services Lifetime Maximum Benefit Tobacco Cessation Individual/Group Sessions Covered subject to the applicable copayment up to a $1,000 maximum per Member per calendar year. Covered up to $5,000 per Member. Covered in full. Approved Pharmacy Products Covered subject to the applicable outpatient prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less of a prescription or refill when provided at GHC Facilities and prescribed by a GHC Provider. Limitations: Coverage for cosmetic services is limited to breast reconstruction following mastectomy, and reconstructive breast reduction on non -diseased breast. Exclusions: Services or programs not provided or authorized by GHC staff (except as specified); travel medications; investigational or experimental procedures, drugs and devices; dental care; arch supports including custom shoe modifications or inserts and their fittings except for therapeutic shoes, modifications and shoe inserts for severe diabetic foot disease; convalescent or custodial care; cardiac rehabilitation programs; services covered by first -party insurance; services covered by government and military programs; employment, license, immigration or insurance examinations or reports. Unless otherwise noted as covered, the following services are also excluded: diagnostic testing of sterility, infertility or sexual dysfunction; work -related conditions (including self-employment, L&I and worker's compensation). 0500575001.doc *G=pHealth COOPERATIVE Group Health Plan Summary of Benefits Renton, City of Effective Date 1/1/2005 Ref 0511626001 This is a brief summary of benefits and limitations. THIS IS NOT A CONTRACT. For a more detailed description of your benefits and exclusions, refer to your certificate of coverage or contact your employer or benefits administrator. Annual Deductible No annual deductible. Plan Coinsurance No plan coinsurance. Lifetime Maximum No lifetime maximum. Hospital Services Covered inpatient medical and surgical Covered in full. services, including acute chemical withdrawal (detoxification) Covered outpatient hospital surgery (including ambulatory surgical centers) Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Outpatient Services (Office Visits) Covered outpatient medical and surgical $25 copayment per Member per visit. services Allergy testing Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Oncology (radiation therapy, chemotherapy) Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Drugs — Outpatient (including mental health drugs, contraceptive drugs and devices and diabetic supplies) Prescription drugs, medicines, supplies and Covered subject to the lesser of GHC's charge or a $10 devices for a supply of thirty (30) days or less copayment. when listed in the GHC drug formulary Over-the-counter drugs and medicines Not covered. Allergy serum Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply. Injectables Injections that can be self-administered are applicable subject to the prescription drug cost share. Mail order drugs and medicines Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less. Growth hormones Covered in full subject to a twelve (12) month waiting period. Except as otherwise noted, total out-of-pocket expenses for the following Covered Services are included in the out-of-pocket limit: • Inpatient Services Out -of -Pocket Limit (Stop Loss) • Outpatient Services Emergency Services at a GHC or non-GHC Facility • Ambulance Services Limited to an aggregate maximum of $2,000 per Member and $4,000 per family per calendar year. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of five (5) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Acupuncture subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Summary of Benefits Page 3 of 4 Maternity and Pregnancy Services Delivery and associated hospital care Covered subject to the applicable inpatient services copayment. Routine prenatal and postpartum care Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered at 80% for up to twelve (12) days per Member per Mental Health Services calendar year at a GHC-approved mental health care facility when Inpatient Services authorized in advance by GHC. Coinsurance does not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Covered subject to a $20 copayment per individual session and a Outpatient Services $10 copayment per Member per group session for up to twenty (20) visits per Member per calendar year. Copayments do not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of two (2) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Naturopathy subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment once every Optical Services twelve (12) months. Eye examinations, including contact lens Routine eye examinations examinations, for eye pathology are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment as often as Medically Necessary. Lenses, including contact lenses, and frames Eyeglass lenses and frames; or contact lenses, including exams associated with their fitting covered up to $100 per Member per any consecutive twenty-four (24) month period. Contact lenses following cataract surgery, when in lieu of an intraocular lens, are covered in full provided the Member has been continuously covered by GHC since such surgery. Contact lenses for eye pathology are covered in full. Replacement of these lenses are covered once within a twelve (12) month period and only when needed due to a change in the Member's medical condition. Covered up to a lifetime maximum of $200,000 (including donor costs up to $50,000), subject to applicable copayments. Coverage Organ Transplants for all transplants, including follow-up care, is excluded until the Member has been continuously covered under a GHC or Group Health Options (GHO) plan for twelve (12) months. Pre -Existing Condition Covered subject to the applicable cost share, with no wait. Preventive Services (Well Adult and Well Child Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment when in accordance with the well -care schedule established by GHC. Physicals, Immunizations, Pap Smears, Excluded are physicals for travel, employment, insurance, license, Mammograms) etc. Rehabilitation Services Inpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services Covered up to sixty (60) days per calendar year, subject to the combined, including services for inpatient copayment. neurodevelopmentally disabled children age six (6) and under Outpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services combined, including services for Covered up to sixty (60) visits per calendar year, subject to the neurodevelopmentally disabled children age outpatient services copayment. six (6) and under Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Covered in full up to a maximum of sixty (60) days per Member per calendar year. Sterilization (Vasectomy, Tuba[ Ligation) Not covered. Procedures to reverse a sterilization are not covered. 0511626001.doc Summary of Benefits Page 4 of 4 Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Services Inpatient and Outpatient TMJ Services Lifetime Maximum Benefit Tobacco Cessation Individual/Group Sessions Covered subject to the applicable copayment up to a $1,000 maximum per Member per calendar year. Covered up to $5,000 per Member. Covered in full. Approved Pharmacy Products Covered subject to the applicable outpatient prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less of a prescription or refill when provided at GHC Facilities and prescribed by a GHC Provider. Limitations: Coverage for cosmetic services is limited to breast reconstruction following mastectomy, and reconstructive breast reduction on non -diseased breast. Exclusions: Services or programs not provided or authorized by GHC staff (except as specified); travel medications; investigational or experimental procedures, drugs and devices; dental care; arch supports including custom shoe modifications or inserts and their fittings except for therapeutic shoes, modifications and shoe inserts for severe diabetic foot disease; convalescent or custodial care; cardiac rehabilitation programs; services covered by first -party insurance; services covered by government and military programs; employment, license, immigration or insurance examinations or reports. Unless otherwise noted as covered, the following services are also excluded: diagnostic testing of sterility, infertility or sexual dysfunction; work -related conditions (including self-employment, L&I and worker's compensation). 0511626001.doc @GmupHeafth COOPERATIVE Group Health Plan Summary of Benefits Renton, City of - Leoff I Active Effective Date 1/1/2005 Ref 0503904001 This is a brief summary of benefits and limitations. THIS IS NOT A CONTRACT. For a more detailed description of your benefits and exclusions, refer to your certificate of coverage or contact your employer or benefits administrator. Annual Deductible No annual deductible. Plan Coinsurance No plan coinsurance. Lifetime Maximum No lifetime maximum. Hospital Services Covered inpatient medical and surgical Covered in full. services, including acute chemical withdrawal (detoxification) Covered outpatient hospital surgery (including ambulatory surgical centers) Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Outpatient Services (Office Visits) Covered outpatient medical and surgical $25 copayment per Member per visit. services Allergy testing Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Oncology (radiation therapy, chemotherapy) Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Drugs — Outpatient (including mental health drugs, contraceptive drugs and devices and diabetic supplies) Prescription drugs, medicines, supplies and Covered subject to the lesser of GHC's charge or a $10 devices for a supply of thirty (30) days or less copayment. when listed in the GHC drug formulary Over-the-counter drugs and medicines Not covered. Allergy serum Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply. Injectables Injections that can be self-administered are applicable subject to the prescription drug cost share. Mail order drugs and medicines Covered subject to the applicable prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less. Growth hormones Covered in full subject to a twelve (12) month waiting period. Except as otherwise noted, total out-of-pocket expenses for the following Covered Services are included in the out-of-pocket limit: • Inpatient Services • Outpatient Services Out -of -Pocket Limit (Stop Loss) Emergency Services at a GHC or non-GHC Facility • Ambulance Services Limited to an aggregate maximum of $2,000 per Member and $4,000 per family per calendar year. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of five (5) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Acupuncture subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Summary of Benefits Page 3 of 4 Maternity and Pregnancy Services Delivery and associated hospital care Covered subject to the applicable inpatient services copayment. Routine prenatal and postpartum care Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered at 80% for up to twelve (12) days per Member per Mental Health Services calendar year at a GHC-approved mental health care facility when Inpatient Services authorized in advance by GHC. Coinsurance does not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Covered subject to a $20 copayment per individual session and a Outpatient Services $10 copayment per Member per group session for up to twenty (20) visits per Member per calendar year. Copayments do not apply to the out-of-pocket limit. Self -referrals to a GHC Provider covered up to a maximum of two (2) visits per Member per medical diagnosis per calendar year, Naturopathy subject to the outpatient services copayment. When approved by GHC, additional visits are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment. Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment once every Optical Services twelve (12) months. Eye examinations, including contact lens Routine eye examinations examinations, for eye pathology are covered subject to the outpatient services copayment as often as Medically Necessary. Lenses, including contact lenses, and frames Eyeglass lenses and frames; or contact lenses, including exams associated with their fitting covered up to $100 per Member per any consecutive twenty-four (24) month period. Contact lenses following cataract surgery, when in lieu of an intraocular lens, are covered in full provided the Member has been continuously covered by GHC since such surgery. Contact lenses for eye pathology are covered in full. Replacement of these lenses are covered once within a twelve (12) month period and only when needed due to a change in the Member's medical condition. Covered up to a lifetime maximum of $200,000 (including donor costs up to $50,000), subject to applicable copayments. Coverage Organ Transplants for all transplants, including follow-up care, is excluded until the Member has been continuously covered under a GHC or Group Health Options (GHO) plan for twelve (12) months. Pre -Existing Condition Covered subject to the applicable cost share, with no wait. Preventive Services (Well Adult and Well Child Covered subject to the outpatient services copayment when in Physicals, Immunizations, Pap Smears, accordance with the well -care schedule established by GHC. Mammograms) Excluded are physicals for travel, employment, insurance, license, etc. Rehabilitation Services Inpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services Covered up to sixty (60) days per calendar year, subject to the combined, including services for inpatient copayment. neurodevelopmentally disabled children age six (6) and under Outpatient physical, occupational and restorative speech therapy services combined, including services for Covered up to sixty (60) visits per calendar year, subject to the neurodevelopmentally disabled children age outpatient services copayment. six (6) and under Skilled Nursing Facility (SNF) Covered in full up to a maximum of sixty (60) days per Member per calendar year. Sterilization (Vasectomy, Tubal Ligation) Not covered. Procedures to reverse a sterilization are not covered. 0503904001.doc Summary of Benefits Page 4 of 4 Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Services Inpatient and Outpatient TMJ Services Lifetime Maximum Benefit Tobacco Cessation Individual/Group Sessions Covered subject to the applicable copayment up to a $1,000 maximum per Member per calendar year. Covered up to $5,000 per Member. Covered in full. Approved Pharmacy Products Covered subject to the applicable outpatient prescription drug cost share for each thirty (30) day supply or less of a prescription or refill when provided at GHC Facilities and prescribed by a GHC Provider. Limitations: Coverage for cosmetic services is limited to breast reconstruction following mastectomy, and reconstructive breast reduction on non -diseased breast. Exclusions: Services or programs not provided or authorized by GHC staff (except as specified); travel medications; investigational or experimental procedures, drugs and devices; dental care; arch supports including custom shoe modifications or inserts and their fittings except for therapeutic shoes, modifications and shoe inserts for severe diabetic foot disease; convalescent or custodial care; cardiac rehabilitation programs; services covered by first -party insurance; services covered by government and military programs; employment, license, immigration or insurance examinations or reports. Unless otherwise noted as covered, the following services are also excluded: diagnostic testing of sterility, infertility or sexual dysfunction; work -related conditions (including self-employment, L&I and worker's compensation). 0503904001.doc CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Utility Systems/Water Utility Staff Contact...... Abdoul Gafour (ext. 7210) Tom Malphrus (ext. 7313) Subject: Consultant Agreement with RH2 Engineering, Inc., for the Design of the Water Utility Emergency Power Generation Facilities Exhibits: Issue Paper Consultant Contract with RH2 Engineering, Inc. Al #: & V.—� For Agenda of: June 13, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information......... X Recommended Action: Approvals: Council Concur Legal Dept......... X Finance Dept...... X Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required $118,664.00 Transfer/Amendment N/A Amount Budgeted $120,000.00 Revenue Generated N/A Total Project Budget $200,000.00 City Share Total Project $118,664.00 (2005 budget for design contract) Account No. 421.000500.018.5960.0034.65.055582 SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Water Utility requests the approval of a Consultant Agreement with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for the design of emergency power generation facilities for Wells 1, 2 and 3, Mt. Olivet pump station, and North Talbot Hill pump station. The proposed facilities will allow the City to operate the wells and pump stations in order to provide water supply for fire fighting and for potable consumption needs during power outages. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve and execute the consultant contract with RH2 Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $118,664.00, to design the emergency power generation facilities for the City of Renton water system. lJAFile Sys\WTR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\Consultan t\AgendaBi ll.doc\AGtp VA 1.,+) PLANNING/BUILDING/ + PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT ,� M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 3, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker-Wheele Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmerman ministrator STAFF CONTACT: Abdoul Gafour, Water Utility Supervisor (ext. 7210) Tom Malphrus, Water Utility Engineer (ext. 7313) SUBJECT: Consultant Agreement with R112 Engineering, Inc., for the Design of Emergency Power Generation Facilities ISSUE: The Water Utility requests the approval of a Consultant Agreement with RH2 Engineering, Inc. for the design of emergency power generation facilities for Wells 1, 2 and 3, Mt. Olivet pump station, and North Talbot Hill pump station. The proposed facilities will allow the City to operate the wells and pump stations in order to provide water supply for fire fighting and for potable consumption needs during power outages. The Water Utility has budgeted sufficient funds in the 2005 Capital Improvement Program budget for this contract. RECOMMENDATION: Approve and execute a Consultant Agreement with RH2 Engineering, Inc., in the amount of $118,664.00, for the design of emergency power generation facilities. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The Water Utility is involved in an ongoing effort to improve the reliability of the water supply system by constructing electrical system upgrades and acquiring portable power generators for the City's water facilities. System reliability is critical during power outages resulting from man-made or natural disasters when water is needed for fire protection and for emergency reserve. Terri Briere, Council President May 25, 2005 Page 2 of 2 Currently, the City has a 500 kW portable generator stored at the Maintenance Shops and a 125 kW portable generator docked at the Highlands Booster Pump Station. Both generators can be transported to power various water system facilities, however both generators are limited in the number of booster pumps or well pumps that they can power. In addition, in an emergency, City crews must transport both generators to the water facilities and perform various manual connections before the generators can be energized to power the facilities. This manual operation may take several hours or longer depending on our ability to move the generators to the facilities from the Maintenance Shops during an emergency. Under this contract, the Consultant, RH2 Engineering, Inc., will prepare the architectural, structural, electrical, and civil site design plans and specifications for the construction of a building that will house two emergency power generators at the Mt. Olivet reservoir site. The Consultant will also design a second docking station at the North Talbot Hill reservoir site to power the North Talbot Hill booster pump station. The City is planning to purchase two new portable generators within the next two years. The existing generator will be connected to Wells 1, 2 & 3, the first new generator will be connected to Mt. Olivet pump station and the second new generator to North Talbot pump station. A transfer switch allows the generators to automatically energize and operate the well pumps during a power failure. Each generator can also be moved from its docking station to another site, as needed. The Water Utility selected RH2 Engineering, Inc., from the approved 2005 Annual Consultant Roster as the firm most qualified to design the emergency power generation facilities. Funding for this project is available from the Water Utility 2005 Capital Improvement Program budget under account number 421.000500.018.5960.0034.65.055582. CONCLUSION: In an effort to continue to improve our water system reliability, the City needs to provide a dedicated emergency power supply to Wells 1, 2 & 3, Mt. Olivet Booster pump station, and North Talbot booster pump station. Under this contract, RH2 Engineering, Inc., will prepare the plans and specifications for the construction of the emergency power generation facilities at the above sites. HAFile Sys\WTR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006',Consultant\lssuePaper.doc\AGtp Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 ENGINEERING ANNUAL CONSULTANT AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on this , day of 2005, by and between the CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION HEREINAFTER CALLED THE "CITY," and RH2 Engineering, Inc., whose address is 12100 NE 195`h St., Ste 100, Bothell, WA 98011, at which work will be available for inspection, hereinafter called the "CONSULTANT." PROJECT NAME: Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 WHEREAS, the City has not sufficient qualified engineering employees to provide the engineering within a reasonable time and the City deems it advisable and is desirous of engaging the professional services and assistance of a qualified professional consulting firm to do the necessary engineering work for the project, and WHEREAS, the Consultant has represented and by entering into this Agreement now represents, that it is in full compliance with the statutes of the State of Washington for registration of professional engineers, has a current valid corporate certificate from the State of Washington or has a valid assumed name filing with the Secretary of State and that all personnel to be assigned to the work required under this Agreement are fully qualified to perform the work to which they will be assigned in a competent and professional manner, and that sufficient qualified personnel are on staff or readily available to Consultant to staff this Agreement. WHEREAS, the Consultant has indicated that it desires to do the work set forth in the Agreement upon the terms and conditions set forth below. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms, conditions, covenants and performances contained herein below, the parties hereto agree as follows: SCOPE OF WORK The Consultant shall furnish, and hereby warrants that it has, the necessary equipment, materials, and professionally trained and experienced personnel to facilitate completion of the work described in Exhibit A, Scope of Work, which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement as though fully set forth herein. The Consultant shall perform all work described in this Agreement in accordance with the latest edition and amendments to local and state regulations, guidelines and policies. The Consultant shall prepare such information and studies as it may deem pertinent and necessary, in order to pass judgment in a sound engineering manner on the features of the work. The Consultant shall make such minor changes, amendments or revisions in the detail of the work as may be required by the City. This item does not constitute an "Extra Work" item as related in Section VIR of the Agreement. The work shall be verified for accuracy by a complete check by the Consultant. The Consultant will be held responsible for the accuracy of the work, even though the work has been accepted by the City. II DESIGN CRITERIA The City will designate the basic premises and criteria for the work needed. Reports and plans, to the extent feasible, shall be developed in accordance with the latest edition and amendments of local and State regulations, guidelines, and specifications, including, but not limited to the following: I LTile Sys\WTR -Drinking Water Ui ihty\WTR-27 -Water Project Files\NA rR-27-3239 -Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\Consultant\ConsultantAgreemei,i\Contract.doc /2000 Consultant.doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 Washington State Department of Transportation/Amencan Public Works Association (WSDOT/APWA), "Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction," as amended by Renton Standard Specification. 2. WSDOT/APWA, "Standard Plans for Road, Bridge and Municipal Construction." Washington State Department of Transportation, "Highway Design Manual." 4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, "Standard Specifications for Highway Bridges." Washington State Department of Transportation, "Bridge Design Manual, Volumes I and 2." 6. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Manual of Highways Hydraulics," except hydrologic analysis as described in item 14. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Materials Laboratory Outline." Transportation Research Board, "Highway Capacity Manual." 9. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, "Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways." 10. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Construction Manual." 11. Washington State Department of Transportation, "Local Agency Guidelines." 12. Standard drawings prepared by the City and furnished to the Consultant shall be used as a guide in all cases where they fit design conditions. Renton Design Standards, and Renton Specifications shall be used as they pertain. 13. Metro Transit, design criteria. 14. King County Surface Water Design Manual, Sections 1.2 and 1.3 of Chapter 1, and Chapters 3, 4, and 5. 15. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets." III ITEMS TO BE FURNISHED TO THE CONSULTANT BY THE CITY The City will furnish the Consultant copies of documents which are available to the City that will facilitate the preparation of the plans, studies, specifications, and estimates within the limits of the assigned work. All other records needed for the study must be obtained by the Consultant. The Consultant will coordinate with other available sources to obtain data or records available to those agencies. The Consultant shall be responsible for this and any other data collection to the extent provided for in the Scope of Work. City will provide to Consultant all data in City's possession relating to Consultants services on the project. Consultant will reasonably rely upon the accuracy, timeliness, and completeness of the information provided by the City. Should field studies be needed, the Consultant will perform such work to the extent provided for in the Scope of Work. The City will not be obligated to perform any such field studies. HAFile Sys\WTR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Witer Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\Consultant\( onsullan[Agreement\Contract.doc 1000 Consultant.doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 IV OWNERSHIP OF PRODUCTS AND DOCUMENTS TO BE FURNISHED BY THE CONSULTANT Documents, exhibits or other presentations for the work covered by this Agreement shall be furnished by the Consultant to the City upon completion of the various phases of the work. All such material, including working documents, notes, maps, drawings, photo, photographic negatives, etc. used in the project, shall become and remain the property of the City and may be used by it without restriction. Any use of such documents by the City not directly related to the project pursuant to which the documents were prepared by the Consultant shall be without any liability whatsoever to the Consultant. All written documents and products shall be printed on recycled paper when practicable. Use of the chasing -arrow symbol identifying the recycled content of the paper shall be used whenever practicable. All documents will be printed on both sides of the recycled paper, as feasible. V TIME OF BEGINNING AND COMPLETION The work detailed in the Scope of Work will be performed according to Exhibit B, Time Schedule of Completion, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though fully set forth. It is agreed that all the Consultant's services are to be completed and all products shall be delivered by the Consultant unless there are delays due to factors that are beyond the control of the Consultant. The Consultant shall not begin work under the terms of this Agreement until authorized in writing by the City. If, after receiving Notice to Proceed, the Consultant is delayed in the performance of its services by factors that are beyond its control, the Consultant shall notify the City of the delay and shall prepare a revised estimate of the time and cost needed to complete the Project and submit the revision to the City for its approval. Time schedules are subject to mutual agreement for any revision unless specifically described as otherwise herein. Delays attributable to or caused by one of the parties hereto amounting to 30 days or more affecting the completion of the work may be considered a cause for renegotiation or termination of this Agreement by the other party. H:\File Sys\WTR - Drinking Water l Jtility\WTR-27 - Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\Consultan t\ConsultantAgreement\Contract. doc /2000 Consultant doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 VI PAYMENT The Consultant shall be paid by the City for completed work for services rendered under this Agreement as provided hereinafter as specified in Exhibit D. Such payment shall be full compensation for work performed or services rendered and for all labor, materials, supplies, equipment, and incidentals necessary to complete the work. All billings for compensation for work performed under this Agreement will list actual time (days and/or hours) and dates during which the work was performed and the compensation shall be figured using the rates in Exhibit C. Payment for this work shall not exceed $ 118,664 without a written amendment to this contract, agreed to and signed by both parties. Cost Plus Net Fee Payment for work accomplished shall be on the basis of the Consultant's actual cost plus a net fee. The actual cost includes direct salary cost, overhead, and direct non -salary cost. 1. The direct salary cost is the salary expense for professional and technical personnel and principals for the time they are productively engaged in the work necessary to fulfill the terms of this Agreement. The direct salary costs are set forth in the attached Exhibit C and by this reference made a part of this Agreement. The overhead costs as identified on Exhibit E are determined as 186.72 percent of the direct salary cost and by this reference made a part of this Agreement. The overhead cost rate is an estimate based on currently available accounting information and shall be used for all progress payments over the period of the contract. The direct non -salary costs are those costs directly incurred in fulfilling the terms of this Agreement, including, but not limited to travel, reproduction, telephone, supplies, and fees of outside consultants. The direct non -salary costs are specified in Exhibit D. Billings for any direct non -salary costs shall be supported by copies of original bills or invoices. Reimbursement for outside consultants and services shall be on the basis of times the invoiced amount. 4. The net fee, which represents the Consultants profit shall be 12.0 percent of direct salary plus overhead costs. This fee is based on the Scope of Work and the estimated labor hours therein. In the event a supplemental agreement is entered into for additional work by the Consultant, the supplemental agreement will include provision for the added costs and an appropriate additional fee. The net fee will be prorated and paid monthly in proportion to the percentage of the project completed as estimated in the Consultant's monthly progress reports and approved by the City. Any portion of the net fee not previously paid in the monthly payments shall be included in the final payment, subject to the provisions of Section XI entitled TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT. Progress payments may be claimed monthly for direct costs actually incurred to date as supported by detailed statements, for overhead costs and for a proportionate amount of the net fee payable to the Consultant based on the estimated percentage of the completion of the services to date. Final payment of any balance due the Consultant of the gross amount earned will be made promptly upon its verification by the City after completion and acceptance by the City of the work under this Agreement. Acceptance, by the Consultant of final payment shall constitute full and final satisfaction of all amounts due or claimed to be due. Payment for extra work performed under this Agreement shall be paid as agreed to by the parties hereto in writing at the time extra work is authorized. (Section VIII "EXTRA WORK"). HA\File Sys\WTR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - F mergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\ConsultanrCon suItan tAgreement\Contract. doe 12000 Consultant.doc bh Frnergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 A short narrative progress report shall accompany each voucher for progress payment. The report shall include discussion of any problems and potential causes for delay. To provide a means of verifying the invoiced salary costs for consultant employees, the City may conduct employee interviews. Acceptance of such final payment by the Consultant shall constitute a release of all claims of any nature, related to this Agreement, which the Consultant may have against the City unless such claims are specifically reserved in writing and transmitted to the City by the Consultant prior to its acceptance. Said final payment shall not, however, be a bar to any claims that the City may have against the Consultant or to any remedies the City may pursue with respect to such claims. The Consultant and its subconsultants shall keep available for inspection, by the City, for a period of three years after final payment, the cost records and accounts pertaining to this Agreement and all items related to, or bearing upon, these records. If any litigation, claim or audit is started before the expiration of the three-year retention period, the records shall be retained until all litigation, claims or audit findings involving the records have been resolved. The three-year retention period starts when the Consultant receives final payment. VII CHANGES IN WORK The Consultant shall make all such revisions and changes in the completed work of this Agreement as are necessary to correct errors appearing therein, when required to do so by the City, without additional compensation. Should the City find it desirable for its own purposes to have previously satisfactorily completed work or parts thereof revised, the Consultant shall make such revisions, if requested and as directed by the City in writing. This work shall be considered as Extra Work and will be paid for as provided in Section VIU. VIII EXTRA WORK The City may desire to have the Consultant perform work or render services in connection with the Project in addition to or other than work provided for by the expressed intent of the Scope of Work. Such work will be considered as Extra Work and will be specified in a Written supplement which will set forth the nature and scope thereof. Work under a supplement shall not proceed until authorized in writing by the City. Any dispute as to whether work is Extra Work or work already covered under this Agreement shall be resolved before the work is undertaken. Performance of the work by the Consultant prior to resolution of any such dispute shall waive any claim by the Consultant for compensation as Extra Work. IX EMPLOYMENT The Consultant warrants that it has not employed or retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, to solicit or secure this contract and that he has not paid or agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for the Consultant, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gifts or any other consideration, contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this contract. For breach or violation of this warranty, the City shall have the right to annul this Agreement without liability, or in its discretion to deduct from the Agreement price or consideration or otherwise recover, the full amount of such fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or contingent fee. Any and all employees of the Consultant, while engaged in the performance of any work or services required by the Consultant under this Agreement, shall be considered employees of the Consultant only and not of the City and any and all claims that may of might arise under the Workman's Compensation Act on behalf of said employees, while so I lAFile Sys\W'TR - Chinking Watcf 1'tility\WTR-27 - Water Project File, WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\('onsultant\C'onsultantAgreei•ient\(7ontract. doc 12000 Consultant doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 engaged and any and all claims made by a third party as a consequence of any negligent act or omission on the part of the Consultant's employees, while so engaged on any of the work or services provided to be rendered herein, shall be the sole obligation and responsibility of the Consultant. The Consultant shall not engage, on a full or part-time basis, or other basis, during the period of the contract, any professional or technical personnel who are, or have been at any time during the period of this contract, in the employ of the City except regularly retired employees, without written consent of the City. If during the time period of this Agreement, the Consultant finds it necessary to increase its professional, technical, or clerical staff as a result of this work, the Consultant will actively solicit minorities through their advertisement and interview process. X NONDISCRIMINATION The Consultant agrees not to discriminate against any client, employee or applicant for employment or for services because of race, creed, color, national origin, marital status, sex, age or handicap except for a bona fide occupational qualification with regard to, but not limited to the following: employment upgrading; demotion or transfer; recruitment or any recruitment advertising; layoff or termination's; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; selection for training; rendition of services. The Consultant understands and agrees that if it violates this Non - Discrimination provision, this Agreement may be terminated by the City and further that the Consultant shall be barred from performing any services for the City now or in the future, unless a showing is made satisfactory to the City that discriminatory practices have terminated and that recurrence of such action is unlikely. XI TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT A. The City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement at any time upon not less than ten (10) days written notice to the Consultant, subject to the City's obligation to pay Consultant in accordance with subparagraphs C and D below. B. In the event of the death of a member, partner or officer of the Consultant, or any of its supervisory personnel assigned to the project, the surviving members of the Consultant hereby agree to complete the work under the terms of this Agreement, if requested to do so by the City. This section shall not be a bar to renegotiations of this Agreement between surviving members of the Consultant and the City, if the City so chooses. In the event of the death of any of the parties listed in the previous paragraph, should the surviving members of the Consultant, with the City's concurrence, desire to terminate this Agreement, payment shall be made as set forth in Subsection C of this section. HAFile Sys\W I R - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Frnergency Power Generation Facilities 2006NConsuItantVonsoItan tAgreemenWon tract. doc /2000 Consultant.doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 C. In the event this Agreement is terminated by the City other than for fault on the part of the Consultant, a final payment shall be made to the Consultant for actual cost for the work complete at the time of termination of the Agreement, plus the following described portion of the net fee. The portion of the net fee for which the Consultant shall be paid shall be the same ratio to the total net fee as the work complete is to the total work required by the Agreement. In addition, the Consultant shall be paid on the same basis as above for any authorized extra work completed. No payment shall be made for any work completed after ten (10) days following receipt by the Consultant of the Notice to Terminate. If the accumulated payment made to the Consultant prior to Notice of Termination exceeds the total amount that would be due as set forth herein above, then no final payment shall be due and the Consultant shall immediately reimburse the City for any excess paid. D. In the event the services of the Consultant are terminated by the City for fault on the part of the Consultant, the above stated formula for payment shall not apply. In such an event the amount to be paid shall be determined by the City with consideration given to the actual costs incurred by the Consultant in performing the work to the date of termination, the amount of work originally required which was satisfactorily completed to date of termination, whether that work is in a form or of a type which is usable to the City at the time of termination, the cost to the City of employing another firm to complete the work required and the time which may be required to do so, and other factors which affect the value to the City of the work performed at the time of termination. Under no circumstances shall payment made under this subsection exceed the amount which would have been made if the formula set forth in subsection C above had been applied. E. In the event this Agreement is terminated prior to completion of the work, the original copies of all Engineering plans, reports and documents prepared by the Consultant prior to termination shall become the property of the City for its use without restriction. Such unrestricted use not occurring as a part of this project, shall be without liability or legal exposure to the Consultant. F. Payment for any part of the work by the City shall not constitute a waiver by the City of any remedies of any type it may have against the Consultant for any breach of this Agreement by the Consultant, or for failure of the Consultant to perform work required of it by the City. Forbearance of any rights under the Agreement will not constitute waiver of entitlement to exercise those rights with respect to any future act or omission by the Consultant. XII DISPUTES Any dispute concerning questions of facts in connection with work not disposed of by agreement between the Consultant and the City shall be referred for determination to the Director of Planning/ Building/Public Works or his/her successors and delegees, whose decision in the matter shall be final and conclusive on the parties to this Agreement. In the event that either party is required to institute legal action or proceedings to enforce any of its rights in this Agreement, both parties agree that any such action shall be brought in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, situated in King County. XIII LEGAL RELATIONS The Consultant shall comply with all Federal Government, State and local laws and ordinances applicable to the work to be done under this Agreement. This contract shall be interpreted and construed in accordance with the laws of Washington. HAFile Sys\WTR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Water Project Fibs\W'rR•27-3239 - Emergency Powet Generation Facilities 2006\('onsultan Worts uitan tAgrcrrnent\('ontract.doc ;2000 Consultant.doc bh Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 The Consultant agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City and its officers and employees harmless from and shall process and defend at its own expense all claims, demands or suits at law or equity arising in whole or part from the Consultant's errors, omissions, or negligent acts under this Agreement provided that nothing herein shall require the Consultant to indemnify the City against and hold harmless the City from claims, demands or suits based upon the conduct of the City, its officers or employees and provided further that if the claims or suits are caused by or result from the concurrent negligence of (a) the Consultant's agents or employees and (b) the City, its agents, officers and employees, this provision with respect to claims or suits based upon such concurrent negligence shall be valid and enforceable only to the extent of the Consultant's negligence or the negligence of the Consultant's agents or employees except as limited below. The Consultant shall secure general liability, property damage, auto liability, and professional liability coverage in the amount of $1.0 million, with a General Aggregate in the amount of $2.0 million, unless waived or reduced by the City. The Consultant shall submit a completed City of Renton Insurance Information Form, and the Standard Acord Certification Form prior to the execution of the contract. The City of Renton shall be named as an "Additional Insured" on all contracts/projects. The Consultant's insurance policy shall be endorsed to add the City of Renton as an Additional Insured. A copy of the endorsement shall be provided to the City. The Consultant shall also submit copies of the declarations pages of relevant insurance policies to the City within 30 days of contract acceptance if requested. The Certification and Declaration page(s) shall be in a form as approved by the City. If the City's Risk Manager has the Declaration page(s) on file from a previous contract and no changes in insurance coverage has occurred, only the Certification Form will be required. The limits of said insurance shall not, however, limit the liability of Consultant hereunder. All coverages provided by the Consultant shall be in a form, and underwritten by a company acceptable to the City. The City will normally require carriers to have minimum A.M. Best rating of A XII. The Consultant shall keep all required coverages in full force and effect during the life of this project, and a minimum of forty five days' written notice shall be given to the City prior to the cancellation of any policy. The Consultant shall verify, when submitting first payment invoice and annually thereafter, possession of a current City of Renton business license while conducting work for the City. The Consultant shall require, and provide verification upon request, that all subconsultants participating in a City project possess a current City of Renton business license. The Consultant shall provide, and obtain City approval of, a traffic control plan prior to conducting work in City right-of-way. The Consultant's relation to the City shall be at all times as an independent contractor HA\File Sys\W TR - Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 - Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 - Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006\Consultant\ConsuItantAgreement\Contract. doc /2000 Consultant.doe bb Emergency Power Generation Facilities 2006 XIV SUBLETTING OR ASSIGNING OF CONTRACTS The Consultant shall not sublet or assign any of the work covered by this Agreement without the express consent of the City. XV ENDORSEMENT OF PLANS The Consultant shall place their certification on all plans, specifications, estimates or any other engineering data furnished by them in accordance with RCW 18.43.070. XVI COMPLETE AGREEMENT This document and referenced attachments contain all covenants, stipulations, and provisions agreed upon by the parties. Any supplements to this Agreement will be in writing and executed and will become part of this Agreement. No agent, or representative of either party has authority to make, and the parties shall not be bound by or be liable for, any statement, representation, promise, or agreement not set forth herein. No changes, amendments, or modifications of the terms hereof shall be valid unless reduced to writing and signed by the parties as an amendment to this Agreement. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision in this Agreement shall not affect the other provisions hereof, and this Agreement shall be construed in all respects as if such invalid or unenforceable provision were omitted. XVII EXECUTION AND ACCEPTANCE This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original having identical legal effect. The Consultant does hereby ratify and adopt all statements, representations, warranties, covenants, and agreements contained in the Request for Qualifications, and the supporting materials submitted by the Consultant, and does hereby accept the Agreement and agrees to all of the terms and conditions thereof. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. CONSULTANT CITY OF RENTON Signature Date Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Date type or print name ATTEST: Title Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk HAFile Sys\WTR -Drinking Water Utility\WTR-27 -Water Project Files\WTR-27-3239 -Emergency Pox%er Generation Facilities 2006\Consultan Won suhantAgreement\Contract.doc l2000 Consultant.doc bh City of Renton — Water Utility Division Design and Services During Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF WORK INTRODUCTION The City of Renton is adding emergency power systems to three (3) of their water pump stations to improve the ability to continue to deliver water to their customers in the event of a power outage. Currently, the City has a portable generator that can power several of their facilities, but this method of providing emergency power does not allow the City to get fire flow credit for the facilities because portable source is not available continually at the site with auto -start and auto -transfer capabilities. Casne Engineering, Inc. previously prepared the Engineering Report that evaluated alternatives for adding emergency power systems to Wells 1, 2, and 3, Mount Olivet and North Talbot pump stations. Wells 1-2-3 is a water source and treatment facility. Mount Olivet and North Talbot are booster pump stations. This Scope of `York details the professional services needed to design the emergency power systems for all three (3) facilities. The design of the systems will utilize the Engineering Report as the foundation to develop detailed plans and specifications for final design. Specifically: construction of facility at Mt Olivet site to house two 560 KW portable generators including auto -start / auto -transfer power switch gear, construction of facility at North Talbot Reservoir site to house one 560 KW portable generator including auto -start / auto -transfer power switch gear; power runs from Mt Olivet generator facility to Mt Olivet Booster Pump Station and to Wells 1, 2 & 3 well house, power runs from Talbot Reservoir generator facility to the North Talbot Booster Pump station, miscellaneous transformers, miscellaneous electrical and structural work and purchase of two 560 KW portable generator sets. This Scope of Work presents RH2 Engineering's approach to preparing the bid ready documents and providing bidding phase services for the emergency power systems project. The design effort involves preparing the civil/site design; HVAC and mechanical design; structural/architectural design (including noise control provisions); design of miscellaneous improvements identified in the Engineering Report; electrical power design; telemetry design; preparing specifications; submitting permit applications; and project management. The bidding phase services include preparing 30 sets of bid documents; responding to bidders' questions, conducting a pre -bid walkthrough; preparing addenda, if necessary.. At the conclusion of this phase, the Scope of Work for services during construction will be prepared at the request of the City. Task 1 Survey and Basis of Design Purpose Prepare site topographic surveys and basis of design. Determine if existing electrical raceways can be used. Subtasks Review "City of Renton Water Utility — Emergency Power Study", Casne Engineering, March 2005. Meet with water utility to review the project scope, visit the project sites and determine the extents of topograph surveys of the sites. Perform field investigation to determine whether or not existing electrical raceways can be used in this project. City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OF WORK Paee 2 of 10 Perform topographic surveys of sites: Mt Olivet site, Talbot Reservoir site (including conduit run route to North Talbot Booster Pump Station), and if necessary, conduit run from Mt Olivet to Well 8 to Wells 1, 2, & 3 s (if new raceways or handholes are necessary) — Survey by land surveyor subconsultant to RH2. Prepare base maps based upon topographic surveys and other information. Prepare preliminary site plans showing proposed facilities and conduit runs. Prepare cover sheet and general information sheet. Prepare basis of design checklists to present options and costs to City for decision (e.g, options for building shells & cost; options for type of fuel for generator sets &life cycle costs; capacity of fuel storage vessels, etc). Meet with City staff to review preliminary site plans and basis of design checklist; prepare technical letter documenting design decisions. Deliverables Topographic Surveys: mylars (22 x 34) of sites and routes, AutoCAD files of sites and routes, Record of Survey for Mt Olivet site parcel(s) and Record of Survey for Talbot Reservoir Site parcels. Basis of Design Checklist Preliminary Site Plans Preliminary Cover and General Info Sheets Task 2 Geotechnical Investigation Purpose Prepare geotechnical investigation for foundation design of generator buildings. Subtasks Conduct geotechnical investigations of generator building sites. Prepare geotechnical reports. Deliverables Geotechnical reports. Task 3 Civil/Site Design Purpose Design civil / site improvements for the project. Subtasks Prepare civil / site designs and plans for both sites (and Mt Olivet to Wells 1, 2 and 3 conduit run, if necessary) including grading, vehicle and personnel access ways (roads and sidewalks) drainage improvements and landscaping. Show locations of new and existing facilities and utilities. last panted 5/27/20-6 9:5d 00 AM J-\data\KFWV-10''00i E—W.- Poker De<ig\Proposal 5 2705\D—,M SOIR' Flnal.d- City of Renton/Water Utilin- Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OF WORK 3of10 Develop the stormwater drainage design to include pipelines and hydraulic calculation summary information in conformance with approved Best Management Practices outlined in the State Department of Ecology 2001 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. Prepare the temporary erosion and sediment control (TESC) plan. Deliverables Civil drawings, details, and specifications required for construction of the project. Stormwater technical report (TIR) for inclusion in the SEPA checklist. The estimated number of civil drawing sheets required is 12. Task 4 Heating and Ventilation Design Purpose To design the heating and ventilation systems for the proposed generator buildings. Subtasks Final design of the generator ventilation system in each building, including ductwork, blower sizing, blower layouts and required building details; and the heating requirements for the generator building to provide easy cold weather starts of the generators. Deliverables HVAC drawings, details, and specifications required for construction of the project. The estimated number of HVAC drawing sheets required is 2. Task 5 Structural and Architectural Design Purpose Prepare the architectural and structural design of the proposed generator buildings as well as modifications to the existing structures for conduit entry. It is assumed for this fee estimate that a City standard CMU block building with metal roof is adequate for this project. Subtasks Structural and architectural design of the two proposed generator buildings. The level of effort shown in the fee estimate assumes that a rebar enforced slab on grade floor with a thickened edge is sufficient for the proposed buildings at the locations shown in the Engineering Report. Architectural/Structural design for all structures will include provision for noise control, as identified by a noise control specialist. The RH2 Project Manager will receive approval of the concepts, all prior to proceeding with the final design of improvements. Structural designs will be based on 2003 International Building Code standards, and geotechnical recommendations. Last p.—d 5/27/2005 9:5400 AM ):\d—\REN\\C 411\2005 Emergence P— I L sign\Proposal 5-27-05\1)-ign SOW Final doe City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE of'tX'Owc 4of10 Provide and document structural calculations for the foundations, walls, roof, structural steel, and seismic restraint. Calculations for manufactured trusses and pre -cast concrete items will be provided by the manufacturer of each item. Design and prepare specifications for mechanical/piping supports. Design structural modifications associated with pipe penetrations through walls and/or slabs in the existing buildings Deliverables Structural and architectural drawings and specifications required for construction of the project; design calculations required for Building Permit. The estimated number of structural and architectural drawing sheets is 8. Task 6 Electrical Design Purpose Design the required modifications to the primary power supply and improvements to the emergency power supply for the proposed facilities. Design of the electrical systems for the generator building is included under this task. Subtasks Verify electrical calculations and generator size requirements presented in "City of Renton Water Utility — Emergency Power Study", Casne Engineering, March 2005. Coordinate with Puget Sound Energy (PSE) on the scope of the project. Design the emergency power improvements for all three facilities including power, lighting, signal, control, smoke detection and intrusion detection systems at the proposed generator buildings. Provide electrical details for the proposed improvements. The proposed fee estimate for this task is assuming that the existing raceways will be used. Deliverables Electrical drawings, details, and specifications required for construction of the project. The estimated number of Electrical drawing sheets required is 5. Task 7 Telemetry Design Purpose Design additions to the telemetry system for remote monitoring of the operation of the emergency generators and the smoke and intrusion detection systems of the buildings housing the generators. Subtasks Design cable connection and wiring of I/O for monitoring operational status of the proposed generators using the RTU panels at each pumping facility. The design will include required modifications to the RTU panels. RH2 will coordinate with the City's SCADA programmer on the necessary modifications and we will prepare a letter describing the work required by your telemetry integrator. It will include the modifications required at the MTU. Program / screen updates at the HQ HMI computer to provide indications of the status of the new Last p,,.-d 5/27, 1'1�0595400 -,Nf J.\data\RFN\\N 1-12005E—g—Power 5-27-Oi\1),,gnSOA'F,..1d- City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OF WORK 5of10 emergency power generation systems, smoke detection and intrusion alarm status at the new generator buildings. Deliverables Telemetry drawings, details, and specifications required for construction of the project. The estimated number of Telemetry drawing sheets required is 2. A letter to the City's SCADA Programmer. Updated HQ HMI program Updated HQ HMI O & M Manual Task 8 Update Estimate of Probable Construction Cost Purpose Provide probable construction costs during the design. Subtasks The probable construction cost estimated during predesign will be updated at the 30%, 65%, 95% and 100 percent design levels. Deliverables Engineers cost estimate (+/- 30%) + consultant services during construction estimate at 30% design. Engineers cost estimate (+/- 25%) + consultant services during construction estimate at 65% design. Engineers cost estimate (+/- 15%) + consultant services during construction estimate at 95% design. Engineers cost estimate (+/- 10%) split out as per the construction bid items + consultant services during construction estimate at 100% design. Task 9 Design Reviews and QA/QC Reviews Purpose Conduct detailed design reviews with City staff at the 30%, 65%, and 95% design completion levels. Conduct internal QA/QC reviews at appropriate points throughout the design development. Subtasks Conduct a detailed internal QA/QC review and perform inter -disciplinary coordination cross- checks at the 65% design level. Perform evaluations of constructability and operability. Provide 30% design level drawings and a preliminary specification list to the City for review. Attend the 30% review meeting with City. Conduct a detailed internal QA/QC review and perform inter -disciplinary coordination cross- checks at the 65% design level. Perform evaluations of constructability and operability. ]—t pnw,d 5/'7/2005 7:54:00 Ail J:\data\REN\ �\ 10\2005 E—g— P— Design\P-p—d 5-27-05\Deign SO\C' Fina].da City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OJ WORK Page 6 of 10 Provide 65% design level drawings and specifications to the City for review. Attend the 65% review meeting with City. Conduct a detailed internal QA/QC review and perform inter -disciplinary coordination cross- checks at the 95% design level. Perform evaluations of constructability and operability. Provide 95% design level drawings and specifications to the City for review. Attend the 95% review meeting with City. The 95% review editing shall be limited to items that were not reviewed at the 65% review. Deliverables Design drawings for review at the 30% design completion level (3 sets for City review). Plans shall be on'/2-size (11" x 17') sheets. Design drawings for review at the 65% design completion level (3 sets for City review). Plans shall be on'/2-size (11" x 17'� sheets. Design drawings for review at the 95% design completion level (5 hard copy sets plus one electronic copy of AutoCAD drawing files for City review). Plans shall be on '/2-size (11" x 17") sheets. A preliminary outline of the technical specifications (Special Provisions) for review at the 30% design completion level (3 sets plus one electronic copy for City review). Preliminary technical specifications for review at the 65% design completion level (3 sets for City review). All technical specifications for review at the 95% design completion level (5 sets for City review). Task 10 Develop Construction Schedule and O&M Guide Outline Purpose Prepare construction schedule and O&M guide outline. Subtasks Prepare a construction schedule for the 95% design completion level submittal. Prepare an outline of the O&M Guide for the project facilities. Deliverables Construction schedule Outline of the O&M Guide Task 11 Prepare Bidding Documents - Construction Drawings Purpose Finalize the drawings to the 100% completion level based on comments from City staff and the permitting agencies on the 95% plans and specifications. The plans will then be suitable for public bidding of the construction project. Last pdnred 5i ` 2005 9.i4:00 AM J:\data\REN A 40\2005 L= nerg— I...... Design\Proposal 5- 27-11� Design SO\[' Final.d— City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OF WORK Subtasks 7of10 Produce the 100% design drawings necessary for the bidding and construction of the project. Incorporate the changes and final edits from the reviews of the 95% drawings. The drawings shall be divided into the following disciplines: General Civil Landscape Structural Architectural Mechanical (including piping and building mechanical) Electrical Process/Instrumentation Make final edits and back -checks of the 100% design drawings following the City's final review. Deliverables Three t/z size (11" x 17") sets of final design drawings for review and final edits. One V2 size (11" x 1T) proof set of bid drawings (stamped and signed) for final review prior to printing. Thirty (30) t/z size (11" x 17'� sets of bid drawings (with copies of stamp and signatures). One set of final (100%) design drawings plus an electronic copy of the AutoCAD drawing files. Drawings shall be full-size (22" x 34' } on mylar with stamps and signatures. AutoCAD drawing files will not include any electronic stamps or signatures. All drawings will be produced in AutoCAD Release 2006 unless otherwise directed. Task 12 Prepare Bidding Documents - Specifications Purpose Finalize the specifications to the 100% completion level based on comments from City staff and the permitting agencies on the 95% plans and specifications. The specifications will then be suitable for public bidding of the construction project. Subtasks Produce the 100% technical specifications necessary for the bidding and construction of the project. Incorporate the changes and final edits from the reviews of the 95% technical specifications. Work with the City to prepare the appropriate bidding forms for inclusion in the bid documents package. The City of Renton uses the Washington DOT Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction and has City Supplemental Provisions. The Consultant will use these Last pnnted 5 '7/2005 9>J.00 "1 JAdata\REKUC'40\2005 Emergent, P. ., D-gn\Prnp I 5-Z7-03\Design SOW FmM d., City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE OI; WORK 8of10 standard specifications and will prepare Special Provisions in CSI format for the technical specifications. Prepare the bid schedule and measurement and payment requirements. Finalize the Engineer's Cost Estimate. Cost and format this estimate to follow the bid schedule. Make final edits and back -checks of the 100% specifications following the City's final review. Deliverables: One final, complete (100%) set (one hard copy and one electronic copy) of the technical specifications (Special Provisions), Supplemental Provisions to the Standard Specifications, and bid schedules for incorporation into the bidding documents. All specifications will be prepared in MS Word format unless otherwise directed. Task 13 Permitting and Project Approval Assistance Purpose Assist the City with the preparation of the permits and design reviews by outside agencies that are necessary for project approval. Subtasks Provide technical information including design calculations, specifications, and drawings, needed for the City to complete and submit the Clearing and Grading, Building, and Fire permit applications to the permitting entities within the City. Address questions and issues associated with the technical aspects of the permit applications, as necessary. Provide technical information and drawings needed for the City to complete and submit the SEPA checklist and Master Application to the City Planning Division. Address questions and issues associated with the technical aspects of the SEPA checklist, as necessary. Deliverables Provide technical information including design calculations, specifications, and drawings, needed for the City to complete and submit the Clearing and Grading, Building, and Fire applications, SEPA checklist, and Master Application. Land Use Permit Master Application / SEPA @ 65% design point (as per "Submittal Requirements for Environmental Review for Project Actions"): Site Plan. Fourteen (14) copies @ 22" x 34". Architectural Elevations. Twelve (12) copies @ 22" x 34". Grading Elevations. Four (4) copies @ 22" x 34". Utilities Plan, Generalized. Five (5) copies @ 22" x 34". Drainage Control Plan. Five (5) copies @ 22" x 34". Drainage Report. Four (4) copies. Geotechnical Report. Five (5) copies. Landscaping Plan, Conceptual. Five (5) copies @ 22" x 34". Last printed �, 27/2005 9 SJ 00 .%M ]:\data\RP.\ \N 40\2005 F—g—, R,— De gn\Proposal 5-7- n,\Design SO\C Final cla City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities SCOPE or WORK 9of10 Floor Plans. Five (5) copies @ 22" x 347' . Plan reductions. One 8- '/2 " x l l" PMT reduction of all full size drawing sheets. Building Permit (as per "Building Permit Requirements: Commercial or Multi - Family"): Complete Set of Plans. Three (3) copies @ 22" x 34". Architectural / Structural Plans. Two (2) copies @ 22" x 34". Civil Plans. Two (2) copies @ 22" x 34". Specifications. Two copies. Stress / structural calculations. Two copies. Geotechnical Report. Two copies. Storm drainage analysis (TIR). Two copies. Energy Code Checklist for Non -Residential Buildings. One copy. Fire Permits Narrative describing how detection, suppression and / or electronic monitoring system works. Catalog cuts of components of proposed systems and tanks. Task 14 Prepare Purchase Specification for Two Trailer Mounted Portable Generator Sets Purpose Provide specifications to advertise for and purchase via sealed bidding process two trailer mounted portable generator sets. Subtasks Verify generator size (electrical output) requirements. Meet with City staff and determine transportability requirements: e.g., overhead clearance limitations, lane width limitations, DOT certification requirements, trailer hitch requirements, etc. Meet with City staff and determine environmental requirements: noise limitations, fuel issues, etc Meet with City staff and determine fuel requirements: type of fuel, amount of on -board (portable) fuel capacity, amount of fuel storage at generator buildings (stationary). Meet with City staff and determine control and telemetry requirements. Prepare specifications for the purchase of the generators including requirements for factory testing, field testing, spare parts and tools, licensing and training. Deliverables Last printed ; 27/2005 9:54:00 AAf j \data\RFC A 40\2005 FmeWnn. Pwcr Design\Proposal 5-27 6\D-gn SO\C FinA dor City of Renton/Water Utility Division Design and Bidding for Emergencv Power Facilities SCOPE OF WORK Page 10 of 10 Specifications for purchase. Paper and electronic copies. Task 15 Assistance During Bidding Purpose Assist the City during the project bidding and contracting phase. It is assumed that the City will advertise the bid, print and distribute bid documents, and maintain the master planholders list. Subtasks: Attend the pre -bid meeting and site visit. Respond to and answer bidders' questions. Prepare up to 3 addenda to the bid documents, as required. After receipt of bids, evaluate the bids received for responsiveness, check references of qualified bidders, prepare bid tabulation summary sheet, and prepare a written recommendation of award to the City. Deliverables One pre -bid meeting (including meeting agenda and a summary of significant notes / issues resulting from the meeting). One photo -ready set of addenda material (up to 3 addenda). Letters to the City summarizing -the bid evaluations and a recommendation for award (one for construction contract and one for generator purchase). Task 16 Project Management Purpose Perform the management, coordination, and administrative functions necessary for the successful completion of the tasks and deliverables. Subtasks Direct the project design team staff in day-to-day design activities. Prepare and maintain files and records of design data and design decisions. Coordinate, prepare materials for, and attend design project review meetings. Coordinate QA functions and reviews. Prepare monthly budget status reports and invoices. Deliverables Copies of design records, correspondence, and associated materials, as requested by the City. Monthly budget status reports. These reports shall document budgeted amounts, amounts expended, amounts remaining, percent of budget expended and remaining at the subtask, task, and project levels. Last printed 5/27/2005 9 54 00 9Nf J.\data\Rl:\\RU0\2005 E—geney P, — Design\Proposal 5-2--05\Deslgn SOA F-2 do, EXHIBIT B Time Schedule of Completion Phase A Design Tasks 1 - 12 Begin: Upon Notice to proceed - Tentatively May 23, 2005 Complete: 100 calendar days after notice to proceed. - August 30, 2005 Tasks 13-14 Begin: After completion of permitting review by Agencies Complete: 45 calendar days Tasks 15 Begin Dependent of Owner's construction schedule End At the completion of bidding process. Principal Descri lion Prof VI Prof V Prof IV Prof III Prof II Prof 1 Technician I Admin N Admin Itl Admin 11 Admin 1 Total Hours Total Labor AuloCAD AutoCAD Computer Plou W.P. Com uler Printirl Mileale Mike. Total Expense Total Cost A Prepare Review Plan Sets _ _ _ _ _ —__ 2 8 2 12 $316 36 1 $117 $43J B Qa/Oc 4 _-- 4 4 12 $534 36 _-------------�-- $87 $621 _ C _ Print Review Sets-- _ 1 6 4 11 $248 115 $245 D_ _ Review comment changes 6 4 1 11 $377 $0 SO $377 377 E _.Review meelinns whh Cif______ 12 1 13 $538 200 $61 $619 Task 9 4 0 25 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 8 59 $2 013 0 187 0 0 200 1 $530 $2 543 Task 10 Develop Construction Schedule an_d O&M Guide Outline A B Prepare Construction Schedule 1 Prepare O&M Guideline 2 2 4 4 1 1 8 7 _ $272 f207 - 1 1 $30 $30_ $302 Task 10 1 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 2 0 15 $479 0 0 0 0 0 2 $60 $539 Task 11 _ Prepare Bidding Documents _Oonstruc_tion Drawings A Prepare final review set 1 2 2 5 $120 1 36 1 $142 $262 _ B Make final edits and back_ Check_ after City __ 4 4 4 12 $534 36 $87 $621 C Prepare Did sets 1 4 4 9 $197 400 3000 $2,030 $2 227 D _ Prepare finalpacka�e for delivery to Cif _ 1 4 1 6 $168 36 $87 S245 Task 11 4 0 7 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 7 32 $1 010 i 508 0 0 3000 1 $2 346 $3 356 Task 12 Prapare,BlddJnj Documents • Specifications A Incorporate front end speck-___ _ _ 1 2 2 4 9 $275 36 1 $117 $392 B Technical speci0calions__ — _ 1 4 6 4 15 $464 100 _ $41 $505 C -_. Prepare Ditl schedule and Cost estimate n_._ _._..___—__.___ 1 1 1 3 $87 115 _ $245 $132 D Prepare bitldin�forms__ _ 1 1 1 3 $87 $0 $87 E _ Final. edits and back -checks after vi _Ciy reew_ _ 2 2 1 5 $156 36 100 $128 $284 Task 12 2 0 10 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 11 0 35 $1 071 0 187 0 0 200 1 $530 $1 601 Task 13 Permitting_and Project Approval Assistance A _Prepare permit appicetion(q _ --_ 2 10 24 2 38 $1,212 186 1 1 $426 $1,638 B _Construction Plan Revisions _ 2 4 16 2 24 $746 12 1 _ $309 $1,055 C Provide support to Cay Curing_process ___ 2 10 24 2 38 $1,212 1 1 $39 $1 251 Task 14 Prepare Purchase Specification for Generator Sets $0 $0 A _Vert requirements,_,_._ 2 4 6 $189 $0 $189 . B Meetings with City_____,__ _ _ _—_ 4 4 $175 100 $41 $216 C_. Prepare Specifications 2 4 4 10 $262 f0 $262 Task 14 0 0 8 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 4 0 20 $626 0 0 0 0 100 0 $41 $666 Task 15 Assistance During A Respontl to Bidders Questions 2 8 10 $291 1 $30 $321 B C Prepare.4ddendums Prepare and abid m _ _ _ — _ _ 4 4 _ _ 16 4 1 24 5 $654 $13 _ 50 1 $30 $20 $684 $213 D Pre are bid tabb and Recommendation 1 _ 2 1 4 $113 _ _ _ __ _ 1 __ _ $30 _ _ $143 Task 16 Prc�)ect Management_ _ _ 0 s0 f0 $0 A Monthly Invoices/Status Updates _ 8 8 $350 $0 $350 _ B Monthly Schedule _ _ _ _ _—_ _ 2 2 $08 $0 $88 C Maintain Project Files _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 12 14 $305 $0 _ $305 Task 16 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 24 743 0 0 0 0 0 0 $0 $743 �RH2 Engineering Total 24 24 194 0 8 346 24 0 0 0 73 15 708 $22,158 97 1104 31 25 3900 25 $7 507 f29,666 City of Renton - Water Utility Division Design and Services During Bidding for Emergency Power Facilities Exhibit D - Professional Services Houriv and Reimbursible Detail Principal Prof Prof Prof Prof Prof Prof Technician Admin Admin Admin Admin Total Total AutoCAD AutoCAD W.P. Total Total Description VI V IV III it t I IV III II 1 Hours Lahr Gmouser Plots Cimn to P I Y c MileageMisc.Esne e C st ask 1 Survey and_ asis of Design A Review Emergency Power StudZ__1 4 4 --- - _— 1 10 $359 - 1 —_ -- f9 $368 8 .:. Facrly lour and Data Coiiection Racewa�nsgecuon . _ 8 8 8 16 8 $553 $203 50 1 50 $50 $26 __$_603 $223 D Develop base MOIRS neral mfo and cover sheets _ 2 16 1 19 fS12 12 8 1 $340 $852 E I F Prepare basis of design checklists Review meeting with Cdy.3 Technical letter. 4 4 8 2 1 14 5 $4/4 $193 1 1 50 1 $9 559 S423 5252 _. _ Task 2 A 8 Geotechnical Investigation_ Preliminary site evaluation and Itr report, 1 Prepare ruP georepon pr necessary, 8 , 2 16 16 24 4 8 31 48 $992 $1,477 4 8 100 1 $107 _ $72 _$7,099 E1,549 Task 3 Civil/Site Design A orepe a Civil and Site Design and Plans 1 8 16 _ 2 27 $857 i 1 1 $39 $896 6 Develop storm --water and drainage design 1 -�- -_ 3 16 20 $602 12 5 $325 5927 C TESC plan _ _ _ _ 1 2 3 $95 f0 $95 Task 4 A 11eatln and Ventilation Desl r1 Heating and Ventilation Design _ _ _ __ 1 3 12 16 $500 9 4 1 $275 $775 __ __ T:1sk4 1 0 3 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 $500 9 4 0 0 0 1 $275 $775 Task 5 1 A Structural and Architectural Design_ _ __ __ _ Structural and Architectural Design 1 16 4 24 1 46 $1,408 18 5 1 1 $514 $1,922 8 tvo,se abatement design 2 4 _ _ _ _ 6-.- _ __ _ f200 $0 $200 Task6 Electrical Design A VertI accurate of Casne_C_alcs_. _ 1 1 _ _ 1 3 $87 1 1 $39 $17 8 _Coordinate with PSE _ _ _ _ _ _. .. 1 1 _ 1 3 $87 1 1 f39 S17 C D Prepare one -line diagrams Prepare -electrical plan - 4 4 16 16 ___ _ _ _ 1— 1 21 21 $599 $599 12 12 5 5 1 1 $334 $331 $93 $9. 1 E Construction details 2 8 _ 10 S291 6 2 5160 $4! Task 6 0 0 12 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 4 0 58 $1,664 30 12 4 0 0 2 $906 $2 57 [Task 7 Telemetry Design - _ _-- ----�---- — _ A Telemetry_ _ 4 4 - - - 2 -- 10 $313 3 _ 2 1 1 $124 $43 B NMI updates at Shops _ 12 1 13 $543 25 100 1 $61 O&M manual updates_ _ _ _ _ 4 8 4_ 18 $451 4 1 _ _$72 _ 566 list __. Tssk 0 0 20 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 7 0 39 $1.307 3 2 5 25 100 3 $262 f1 SE Tasa c �poate Estimate of Probable Construction Cost A.. Preliminaacost estimate ,_. 1 2 1 4 $113 1 1 --$39- -- - $1! B i C D _ 65 ;b update _ 90°o update Final update _________ _ __._ 1 __ 1 1 1 2 2 2 3 3 1 $95 $95 $159 t _1 1 f30 $30 S30 ft: fiS S1f Task 5 1 0 4 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 14 $461 0 0 1 0 0 4 $129 M T.— 9 Design Review and Qa/Qc Reviews wNIYr�EYxnru,"Ono,n, EXHIBIT C Consultant Fee Determination Summary Sheet (Cost Plus Fixed Fee) Prepared By: Mark Miller Date: I May 27, 2005 Project: 2005 Emergency Power Design Dtrecf Salary Range Estimated Classification Low High Hours Rate (1) Cost Principal VIII $61.70 $67.05 24 x $64.38 x $1,545.00 Professional VI $43.00 $47.35 24 x $45.18 x $1,084.20 Professional V $33.00 $43.75 194 x $43.75 x $8,487.50 Professional 111 $26.00 $30.30 8 x $28.15 x $225.20 Professional 11 $23.50 $27.28 346 x $25.39 x $8,784.94 Professional 1 $18.00 $24.75 24 x $21 . 38 x $513.00 Administrative 11 $17.10 $19.20 73 x $18.15 x $1,324.95 Administrative 1 1 $10.501 $15.301 15 x $12.90 x $193.50 Total flours 708 Total DSC = $22,158 OVERHEAD -(OH Cost ificlodhf SalaryAd W 411 T, 01-1 Rate x DSC or 186.72% x $22,158 $41,375 M, W-g* Q0 MR, ill al M MEa-TEE (F FF Rate x (DSC+Ofi) or 12.00% x $63,533 = $7,624 T, & I Lk Ila K K Iten-iized:AC123 (See Exhibit D Hours Detail) $7,507 SUBCONSULTANT COST $40,000 Survey $23,000.00 Geotechnical Engineer $10,000.00 Landscape Architect $5,000.00 Noise Abatement Specialist $2,000.00 Grand Total: $118,664 1 - Estimated rate based on weighted average of employee team. Billing to be based on actual DSC of each employee Exhibit E 2005 Multiplier 286.720% Direct Labor 100.000% FICA 13.180% Unemployment Compensation 1.400% Company Insurance and Medical 14.410% Medical Aid and Industrial Insurance 1.170% Vacation, Sick, and Holiday Leave 16.050% Profit Sharing 44.800% Total Fringe 91.010% Office Miscellaneious, Postage 0.840% Administration and Time Unassignable 48.760% State B&O and Other Business Tax 5.800% Professional Services 0.250% Rent 23.730% Utilities and Maintenance 2.560% Printing, Stationery and Supplies 1.520% Telephone not assignable 4.370% Travel not assignable 1.610% Insurance 4.770% Fees, Dues, Professional Meetings 1.500% Total Overhead 95.710% Total Overhead and Fringe 186.720% Ar m OVER BY � Ce b V COUNCIL Date COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE REPORT June 13, 2005 Library Board Appointment (Referred May 23, 2005) The Community Services Committee recommends concurrence in the Mayor's appointment of Heidi Beckley to the Library Board for a five-year term expiring June 1, 2010. Toni Nelson, Chair Marcie Palmer, Vice Chair Dan Clawson, Member Cc: Dennis Culp, Administrator, Community Services Department Marilyn Pederson, Assistant Library Director FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT C117' COUNCIL { June 13, 2005 Date APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on June 13, 2005, claim vouchers 237891-238476 and 3 wire transfers, totaling $3,465,339.95 , and 575 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 57502-57757, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $1,899,288.87 . Don Perss n, Chair Toni Nelson, Vice -Chair k'.,�' Denis Law, Member FINANCE COMMITTEE Date COMMITTEE REPORT June 13, 2005 2005 BUDGET AMENDMENT ORDINANCE (Referred June 6, 2005) The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve carry forward requests and additional appropriations in various funds totaling $24,654,915 for the purpose of meeting 2004 obligations in 2005. These appropriation adjustments will result in the 2005 Annual Budget being increased from $152,731,500 to $177,386,415. Funding for a comprehensive utility rate study is included in this budget adjustment. The administration will review the scope of work for the rate study with the City Council prior to its initiation. The Committee further recommends that the Ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. Don Persson, Chair Toni lson, Vice air Denis W. Law, Member MWR/dlf cc: Michael R. Wilson, Interim Finance & IS Administrator Linda Parks, Fiscal Service Director Bang Parkinson, Finance Analyst Supervisor CITY OF RENTON, WASH NGTON RESOLUTION NO. 3759 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, APPROVING FINAL PLAT (MAUREEN HIGHLANDS DIVISION III; FILE NO. LUA-05-049,FP). 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 L The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. 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 property, consisting of approximately 4.6 acres, is located east of Rosario Avenue NE and north of NE 4 Street) 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 June 1, 2005. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of 72005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of , 2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 1116:6/06/05:ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2 CORE DESIGN, INC. BELLEVUE, WA 98007 CORE Project No: 03024 LEGAL DESCRIPTION — Maureen Highlands Div.11l Parcel A of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment LUA-05-028-LLA, according to the lot line adjustment thereof recorded May 3, 2005 under King county recording No. 20050503900029. CADocuments and Settings\jsitthidet\Local Settings\Temp\MXLibDir\03024L11 Div IIILEGAL.doc rl RENTON HIGHLANDS _ 0 Co r 1 - NE 7 t*_ — -� --i— -< < cu - cn ro m NE .4th St SE 128 ST cn c„ > 1T CD�.I c/) rn 142nd S# E 144th St VICINITY MAP N N.T.S. MAUREEN HIGHLANDS, DIV.10 PAGE FINAL PLAT VICINITY MAP 141`1 14711 NE 2ft Place, #101 Bellevue, WashJngtoa 98007 425.885.7877 Fax 425.8857963 fir' C?ESlGN ENGINEERING • PIANNiNG • SURVEYING -jC►E3 NtJ_ C73+2'et /3[� G -6-zoos a,or 6 - i3-a oos CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADDING A NEW SUBSECTION TO SECTION 5-1-2.F OF CHAPTER 1, FEE SCHEDULE, OF TITLE V (FINANCE AND BUSINESS REGULATIONS) AND A NEW CHAPTER, 6-27, SHOPPING CART REGULATION, TO TITLE VI (POLICE REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 4260 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON- RELATING TO ABANDONED SHOPPING CARTS. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Section 5-1-2.F of Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby amended by adding the following fee: Review of Shopping Cart Containment and Retrieval Plans: $100 SECTION H. A new Chapter, 6-27, Shopping Cart Regulation, of Title VI (Police Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington" is hereby added, to read as follows: 6-27 SHOPPING CART REGULATION SECTION: 6-27-1: PURPOSE 6-27-2: DECLARATION OF NUISANCE 6-27-3: SHOPPING CART CONTAINMENT AND RETRIEVAL PLANS; APPLICABILITY 6-274: EXEMPTIONS 6-27-5: DEFINITIONS 6-27-6: SHOPPING CART CONTAINMENT AND RETRIEVAL PLANS 6-27-7: RETRIEVAL AND USAP'OUND PROCEDURES 6-27-8: FEES AND DISPOSITION OF CARTS 6-27-9: ILLEGAL POSSESSION OR ACCUMULATION OF CARTS ORDINANCE NO. 6-27-1. PURPOSE. It is the primary purpose of this ordinance to provide for the prompt retrieval of lost, stolen or abandoned shopping carts in order to promote public safety and improve the image and appearance of the City. It is a purpose of this ordinance to have the owners and operators of businesses providing shopping carts use the means available to them to deter, prevent or mitigate the removal of shopping carts from their business premises. It is a further purpose of this ordinance to prevent the illegal removal of shopping carts from the business premises, to prevent the continued possession of illegally removed carts, and to prevent the accumulation of illegally removed carts on public or private properties. 6-27-2. DECLARATION OF NUISANCE. Retail establishments provide shopping carts for the convenience of customers shopping on the premises of the businesses. Shopping carts that have been removed from the premises of the business and left abandoned on public or private property throughout the City constitute a public nuisance and a potential hazard to the health and safety of the public. Shopping carts abandoned on public and private property can create conditions of blight in the community, obstruct free access to sidewalks, streets and other right of ways, interfere with pedestrian and vehicular traffic on pathways, driveways, public and private streets, and impede emergency services. It is for these reasons such lost, stolen, or abandoned shopping carts are hereby declared to be a public nuisance which shall be subject to abatement in the manner set forth in this chapter, or in any other manner provided by law. For purposes of this chapter, any shopping cart located on any public or private property other than the premises of the retail establishment from which such shopping cart was removed ki ORDINANCE NO. shall be presumed lost, stolen, or abandoned, even if in the possession of any person, unless such person in possession thereof is: A. An Authorized Agent; or B. Retrieval Personnel; or C. Enforcement Personnel; or D. An Authorized Customer. 6-27-3. SHOPPING CART CONTAINMENT AND RETRIEVAL PLANS; APPLICABILITY. Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, every owner who provides shopping carts to customers for use on the premises of any retail establishment shall develop, implement and comply with the provisions of a written Shopping Cart Containment and Retrieval Plan approved by the City to provide for the containment of shopping carts on the premises of the retail establishment (Shopping Cart Containment Plan), and for the retrieval of lost, stolen, or abandoned shopping carts which have been removed from the premises of the retail establishment (Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan). 6-27-4. EXEMPTIONS. The requirements of this Chapter shall not apply to any retail establishment which provides a total of 10 or fewer shopping carts for use by customers of such business, or which retail establishment complies with the requirements of RMC 6-27-3. This Chapter shall not apply to carts that are removed for repair or maintenance. 6-27-5. DEFINITIONS. Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, the following words and terms as used in this chapter shall have the following meaning: 3 ORDINANCE NO. A. Authorized Agent: The owner, or an employee or authorized agent of the owner, entitled to possession of the shopping cart. B. Authorized Customer: A customer of the owner of the shopping cart, having the written permission of the owner or owner's agent to remove the shopping cart from the owner's premises. Such permission, however, shall contain a requirement that the cart be returned immediately after its use. C. Enforcement Personnel: Any police officer, code enforcement inspector, or designated staff employed by the City of Renton. D. Lost, Stolen, or Abandoned Shopping Cart: A shopping cart that is either: 1. Removed from the premises of a retail establishment by any person without the written permission or consent of the owner of the shopping cart or the retailer otherwise entitled to possession of such cart, or 2. Left unattended, discarded or abandoned upon any public or private property other than the premises of the retail establishment from which the shopping cart was removed, regardless of whether such shopping cart was removed from the premises with permission of the owner. 3. For purposes of this chapter, any shopping cart located on any public or private property other than the premises of the retail establishment from which such shopping cart was removed shall be presumed lost, stolen, or abandoned, even if in the possession of any person, unless such person in possession thereof is either: a. The owner, or an employee or authorized agent of the owner, entitled to possession of said shopping cart; or, 0 ORDINANCE NO. b. An officer, employee or agent of a cart retrieval service hired by the owner to retrieve such carts; or, C. City enforcement personnel retrieving, storing or disposing of said cart pursuant to the provisions of this code. d. A customer with written permission from the owner or agent of the owner to take the cart off premises. E. Owner: Any person or entity, in connection with the conduct of a business who owns, leases, possesses, or makes a shopping cart available to customers or the public. F. Parking Area: A parking lot or other property provided by a retail establishment for the use of customers of said retail establishment for the parking of customer vehicles. The parking area of a retail establishment located in a multi -store complex or a shopping center shall include the entire parking area used by the multi -store complex or shopping center. G. Premises: Any building, property, or other area upon which any retail establishment business is conducted or operated in the City of Renton, including the parking area provided for customers in such retail establishment. H. Retail Establishment: Any business located in the City of Renton which offers or provides shopping carts for the use of the customers of such business regardless of whether such business is advertised or operated as a retail or wholesale business, and regardless of whether such business is open to the general public, is a private club or business, or is a membership store. I. Retrieval Personnel: Those persons identified in the Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan as providing cart retrieval services, whether employees of the business or independent contract services. 5 ORDINANCE NO. J. `Shopping Cart' or `Cart': A basket which is mounted on wheels or a similar device generally used in a retail establishment by a customer for the purpose of transporting goods of any kind. 6-27-6 SHOPPING CART CONTAINMENT AND RETRIEVAL PLANS A. Plans Required. Shopping Cart Containment and Retrieval Plans shall be required to be filed with the Development Services Director either: within six (6) months of the opening of the business; or, within six (6) months of the effective date of this ordinance. The plan shall include sections detailing the store's strategy for preventing shopping carts from leaving the business site and parking lot (Shopping Cart Containment), and defining the methods that will be implemented to retrieve shopping carts abandoned off -site (Shopping Cart Retrieval). B. Shopping Cart Containment Plans. Shopping Cart Containment Plans shall detail the business' approach to retain carts on the property occupied by the business. At a minimum, each Shopping Cart Containment Plan must demonstrate how the following requirements B.1 through BA will be met. 1. Signs on carts required: Every shopping cart made available for use by customers shall have a sign permanently affixed to it that includes the following information in accordance with RCW 9A.56.270, as now enacted or hereafter amended: a. Identification of the owner of the shopping cart or the name of the business establishment, or both. b. Notification to the public of the procedure to be utilized for authorized removal of the cart from the business premises. 0 ORDINANCE NO. C. Notification to the public that unauthorized removal of the cart from the premises of the business, or the unauthorized possession of the cart, is a violation of City and state law. d. A current telephone to report the location of the abandoned cart. 2. Notice to customers: Written notice shall be provided to customers, that the removal of shopping carts from the premises is prohibited. Such notice may be provided in the form of flyers distributed on the premises, notice printed on shopping bags, direct mail, notices on business websites, or any other means demonstrated to be effective. Conspicuous signs shall be placed and maintained on the premises near all customer entrances and exits and throughout the premises, including the parking area, warning customers that removal of shopping carts from the premises is prohibited by state and City law. 3. Employee training: The owner of the retail establishment shall implement and maintain a periodic training program for new and existing employees designed to educate such employees of the requirements of the Abandoned Cart Prevention Plan and the provisions of state and City law prohibiting the unauthorized removal of shopping carts from the premises of the retail establishment. 4. Measures to contain shopping carts on site: The owner of the retail establishment may install specific physical measures on the carts or implement other measures to prevent cart removal from business premises. These measures may include, but are not limited to: a. Installing disabling devises on all carts, b. Posting store personnel to deter and stop customers who attempt to remove carts from business premises, 7 ORDINANCE NO. prevent cart removal, C. Installing bollards and chains around business entrances/exits to d. Requiring security deposits for use of all carts, or e. Providing carts for rental or sale that can be temporarily or permanently used for the purpose of transporting purchases. 5. Collaboration with other businesses: Two or more retail establishments located within the same shopping or retail center or sharing a common parking area may collaborate and submit a single Shopping Cart Containment Plan. C. Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan. Shopping Cart Retrieval Plans shall detail the business' approach for retrieving shopping carts removed from the property occupied by the business. At a minimum, each Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan must demonstrate how the following requirements of subsection C will be met. 1. Retrieval personnel. The owner shall provide personnel for the purposes of the retrieval of lost, stolen or abandoned shopping carts. Such personnel may be either employees of the business or one or more independent contractors hired by the owner to provide shopping cart retrieval services, or a combination of both. The Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan shall either: (a) Identify the number of employees who will be assigned such cart retrieval duties, the number of total hours per week that each assigned employee will perform such services, and the training each of such personnel has received or will receive concerning the retrieval of lost, stolen or abandoned shopping carts, or (b) Include a copy of each contract with a cart retrieval service (other than confidential financial information that may be retracted from the contract). 2. Prompt retrieval of carts. The owner shall: �;1 ORDINANCE NO. (a) Provide retrieval personnel in sufficient number to assure that all public streets within a minimum one-half mile radius of the premises of the retail establishment are patrolled not less often than every 72 hours. (b) Immediately retrieve and remove each lost, stolen or abandoned shopping cart owned or provided by the retail establishment which is found as a result of such patrols from any public or private property upon which the cart is found. 3. Patrol area and resources. The Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan shall: (a) Identify the streets and bus stops which will be patrolled as required by this subsection as well as the manner, frequency, and times of such patrols. (b) Include information such as the number of trucks, hours of operation and retrieval personnel, as reasonably required by the City to assure that the owner is devoting sufficient resources to cart retrieval operation to comply with the approved Shopping Cart Containment Plan. D. Plan Submittal and City Review 1. Plan review and decision. Upon the filing of any proposed plan pursuant to this chapter, and receipt of the required $100 processing fee, the Development Services Director shall review said proposed plan and either: 1) approve, 2) approve with conditions, or 3) deny the Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention Plan. If the proposed plan is denied, the notice of decision givdn to the owner shall state the grounds upon which the proposed plan was denied. The owner may appeal a decision of the Development Services Director to the Hearing Examiner in the time and manner provided in RMC 4-8-110. 2. Amendments by owner. The owner of any retail establishment which has an approved Abandoned Shopping Cart Prevention Plan conforming to the requirements of this I ORDINANCE NO. chapter may, at any time, submit a proposed amendment to the approved plan, which shall be processed and a decision issued within fourteen (14) calendar days following the receipt thereof by the Development Services Director. 3. Implementation of plan. The proposed measures shall be implemented no later than ninety (90) days after City approval is given, unless otherwise stated in the decision approving the plan. Unless otherwise agreed, any modifications to the plan imposed by the City shall be implemented within ninety (90) days after the City notifies the owner of the needed modifications. E. Appeals. 1. Filing of appeal. Any owner aggrieved by any adverse decision of the Development Services Director pursuant to this chapter may appeal such decision within fourteen (14) calendar days following the date of such decision by filing with the Hearing Examiner or City Clerk a written notice of appeal briefly stating the grounds for such appeal. The notice of decision shall be deemed filed on the date the $75.00 appeal processing fee has been paid. No appeal shall be accepted for filing and processing by the Development Services Director unless accompanied by the appeal processing fee. 2. Notice of hearing. If the appeal is timely filed, the Examiner shall cause the matter to be set for hearing. The appellant shall be provided not less than 10 calendar days written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing. The Hearing Examiner shall conduct the hearing pursuant to the provisions ofRMC 4-8-110. F. Failure to File Shopping Cart Containment and Retrieval Plan: Failure to timely file a Shopping Cart Containment Plan or a Shopping Cart Retrieval Plan shall be illegal and an infraction punishable under RMC 1-3-2. 10 ORDINANCE NO. 6-27-7. RETRIEVAL AND MPOUND PROCEDURES. A. Retrieval of Shopping Carts. The City may immediately retrieve any lost, stolen or abandoned shopping cart within the City where the location thereof will impede emergency services. The City may immediately retrieve any lost, stolen or abandoned cart within the City which does not have the required sign affixed to it. The City may retrieve any lost, stolen or abandoned shopping cart within the City which has the sign affixed thereto after providing the requisite notice to the owner, retailer, or agent, unless such notice has been voluntarily waived by the owner, retailer, or agent. B. Impoundment with Notice. Enforcement personnel may impound a shopping cart which has a sign affixed to it as described above, if both of the following conditions have been satisfied. 1. Location outside of premises. The shopping cart is located outside the premises or parking area of a retail establishment, and, 2. Failure to retrieve cart. The shopping cart is not retrieved within one (1) day from the date the owner of the shopping cart, or its agent, receives actual notice from the City of the shopping cart's discovery. C. Impoundment without Notice. A shopping cart may be impounded without notice if one of the following conditions is satisfied. I. Hazardous location. If a shopping cart will impede emergency services, or the normal flow of vehicular or pedestrian traffic, or is on private property, City enforcement personnel are authorized to immediately retrieve the shopping cart from public or private property and impound it; or, 11 ORDINANCE NO. 2. Lack of identification. If a shopping cart does not have the required identification sign affixed thereto, City enforcement personnel are authorized to immediately retrieve the shopping cart from the public or private property and impound it. 6-27-8. FEES & DISPOSITION OF CARTS A. Failure to retrieve carts. The City may impound any shopping cart not retrieved by its owner after the owner has received the City's one -day verbal notice. B. Impounded carts. The City shall charge a fee to the owner of a shopping cart if the owner fails to retrieve its impounded shopping cart(s) after receiving notice from the City in the amount of a $50 fine for each cart. Each cart the City collects shall constitute a separate violation. However, any owner having installed a locking device on its carts, and that locking device has been disabled by other than the owner, then that cart shall be exempt from the $50 fine. C. Disposition of carts. The City may sell or otherwise dispose of any cart not reclaimed from the City within 30 days from the date of the City's notification to the owner. 6-27-9. ILLEGAL POSSESSION OR ACCUMULATION OF CARTS A. Any person removing a shopping cart from the premises of an owner, without the written permission of the owner or the owner's authorized agent, shall be guilty of theft in the P degree, which is a misdemeanor. B. Any owner or lessee of residential property that knowingly allows one or more shopping carts to remain on the leased property without written permission of the owner of the shopping cart or the owner's authorized agent, is guilty of possession of stolen property in the 3rd degree, which is a gross misdemeanor. The owner or lessee shall be exempt from the provisions of this ordinance if the owner or lessee contacts the owner of the cart(s) weekly until the carts are removed and asks that the carts be retrieved, keeping a record of such contact. 12 C. Any owner of multi -family housing which allows an accumulation of three or more shopping carts upon the multi -family premises shall be guilty of a nuisance. Such accumulation shall be illegal, and an infraction under RMC 1-3-2, and punishable thereunder. There shall be an exemption for the owner of any multi -family housing who has sent a letter to all tenants, on a quarterly basis, advising the tenants to not leave shopping carts on the premises of the multi- family property and who has kept a record of such letters. The owner of the multi -family housing, to claim this exemption, must also contact the owner of the carts weekly until the carts are removed, and ask that the carts be retrieved, keeping a record of the date and time of such contact. D. Any owner of commercial or industrial property which allows the accumulation of one or more shopping carts, not maintained as part of the business, shall be guilty of a nuisance. Such accumulation shall be illegal, and an infraction under RMC 1-3-2, and punishable thereunder. The owner of the commercial or industrial property may claim an exemption from this infraction. To claim this exemption, the owner must contact the owner of the carts weekly until the carts are removed and ask that the carts be retrieved, keeping a record of the date and time of such contact. SECTION IIL This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk 13 ORDINANCE NO. APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of 2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 1165:5/24/05:ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 14