The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCouncil 02/14/2005AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING February 14, 2005 Monday, 7:30 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. ROLL CALL 3. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 4. 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. 5. 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 February 7, 2005. Council concur. b. City Clerk reports appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the Park Place Preliminary Plat (PP-04-126); appeal filed by Michael Witek, 1001 4th Ave., Suite 4200, Seattle, 98154, representing Heritage Homes on 1/21/2005, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consideration of the appeal by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties (RMC 4-8-110F.6.). c. City Clerk reports appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the Amberwood Phase II Preliminary Plat (PP-04-117); appeal filed by Amy L. Kosterlitz, 2025 1st Ave., Suite 500, Seattle, 98121, representing Steven Beck on 2/01/2005, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Consideration of the appeal by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties (RMC 4-8-110F.6.). d. City Clerk reports bid opening on 2/8/2005 for CAG-05-001, Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase 11; 14 bids; engineer's estimate $2,323,479.49; and submits staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, RCI Construction Group, in the amount of $1,915,867.90. Council concur. e. Community Services Department submits CAG-04-113, 200 Mill Building Chiller Replacement; and requests approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $69,604.13 commencement of 60-day lien period, and release of retained amount of $5,588 to MacDonald -Miller Facility Solutions, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. f. Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends acceptance of a quit claim deed from Sound Transit and approval of Sound Transit's request for easement across City -owned property located in the vicinity of Oakesdale Ave. SW and SW 27th St. with the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. Council concur. g. Transportation Systems Division recommends concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation's I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton City limit to SR-169. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. (CONTINUED ON REVERSE SIDE) h. Transportation Systems Division recommends concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation's five percent design for the I-405 and SR-167 interchange. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. i. Utility Systems Division recommends concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the creation of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. Refer to Utilities Committee. 6. CORRESPONDENCE 7. 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. Committee of the Whole: Pavilion Building Proposals and Recommendation b. Community Services Committee: City Center Parking Garage Artwork Contract with Richard C. Elliott c. Finance Committee: Vouchers; Ordinance for New Fees for Special Water Meter Read Services; Ordinance for New Fees for Utility Outstanding Balance Searches; 2005/2006 Claims Processing Fee Schedule with Healthcare Management Administrators d. Planning & Development Committee: R-1 Zone Community Separators 8. RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Ordinances for first reading: a. Service fees for special water meter read services (see 7.c.) b. Service fees for utility outstanding balance searches (see 7.c.) 9. NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; call 425-430-6512 for recorded information.) 10. AUDIENCE COMMENT 11. ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Harvest Partners Conceptual Development Plan for Lakeshore Landing Briefing; Pavilion Building Proposals and Recommendation * Hearing assistance devices for use in the Council Chambers are available upon request to the City Clerk * CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS ARE TELEVISED LIVE ON GOVERNMENT ACCESS CHANNEL 21 AND ARE RE-CABLECAST TUES. & THURS. AT 11:00 AM & 9:00 PM, WED. & FRI. AT 9:00 AM & 7:00 PM AND SAT. & SUN. AT 1:00 PM & 9:00 PM RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting February 14, 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; ALEX PIETSCH, Economic Development Administrator; DEREK TODD, Assistant to the CAO; COMMANDER TIM TROXEL, Police Department. 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 leak occurred in the 12-inch water main in the 4000 block of Sunset Blvd. on February 9th at 7:15 a.m., and water to a number of customers was temporarily shut off. It was discovered that a cap had come off a three- quarter -inch water line, and once it was repaired, water was restored to the customers and Sunset Blvd. was reopened by 3:45 p.m. • A meeting was held with three North Renton residents to discuss increased truck traffic in North Renton on February 7th. Additionally, these residents expressed concerns about illegal parking along Meadow Ave. N. near Bronson Way N. The Police and Planning/Building/Public Works Departments are working with the neighbors to reduce unauthorized truck traffic in North Renton and to eliminate unlawful parking in the areas of concern. King County: Councilmember Mayor Keolker-Wheeler introduced Metropolitan King County Councilmember Introduction (Reagan Dunn, Reagan Dunn, who was recently appointed to fill the vacancy in District 6 District 6) created by Rob McKenna's election as Washington State Attorney General. Mr. Dunn noted that Renton historically has not had the attention it deserves from the King County Council, and stated that he will continue to make sure that District 6 is well represented. Expressing his willingness to work with the Renton City Council, Mr. Dunn shared his plans to open a district office in the Renton Highlands, and his plans to work on transportation issues. AUDIENCE COMMENT Stan La Rue, 2505 Maple Valley Hwy., Renton, 98058, stated that he sent a Citizen Comment: La Rue - letter to Council concerning a tree that fell across the Cedar River onto his Fallen Tree Across Cedar property. He inquired as to what government entities are responsible for River addressing this matter. Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator, stated that the City became aware of the fallen tree at the beginning of February. He explained that in the past, the City traditionally removed logs that presented a safety hazard. However, over the last few years, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has been reluctant to issue permits for the removal February 14, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 51 of woody debris and logs from the river due to the beneficial habitat the debris provides for the fish. Pointing out that the fallen tree poses a safety hazard, Mr. Zimmerman reported that the City has scheduled a meeting with WDFW on February 16th to discuss the matter. He noted that the City will remove the fallen tree if a permit from WDFW is obtained. Mayor Keolker-Wheeler assured Mr. La Rue that the City will inform him of the outcome of the meeting. Councilmember Corman thanked Mr. La Rue for his concern regarding the safety hazard created by the fallen tree. 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 February 7, 2005. Council concur. February 7, 2005 Appeal: Park Place City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the Park Preliminary Plat, Heritage Place Preliminary Plat (PP-04-126); appeal filed on 1/21/2005 by Michael Homes, PP-04-126 Witek, 1001 4th Ave., Suite 4200, Seattle, 98154, representing Heritage Homes, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Appeal: Amberwood Phase II City Clerk reported appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation on the Preliminary Plat, Steve Beck, Amberwood Phase lI Preliminary Plat (PP-04-117); appeal filed on 2/1/2005 by PP-04-117 Amy L. Kosterlitz, 2025 1st Ave., Suite 500, Seattle, 98121, representing Steve Beck, accompanied by required fee. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. CAG: 05-001, Sunset Sewer City Clerk reported bid opening on 2/8/2005 for CAG-05-001, Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase H, RCI Interceptor Phase H; 14 bids; engineer's estimate $2,323,479.49; and submitted Construction Group staff recommendation to award the contract to the low bidder, RCI Construction Group, in the amount of $1,915,867.90. Council concur. CAG: 04-113, 200 Mill Community Services Department submitted CAG-04-113, 200 Mill Building Building Chiller Replacement, Chiller Replacement; and requested approval of the project, authorization for MacDonald -Miller Facility final pay estimate in the amount of $69,604.13 commencement of 60-day lien Solutions period, and release of retained amount of $5,588 to MacDonald -Miller Facility Solutions, Inc., contractor, if all required releases are obtained. Council concur. Public Works: Sound Transit Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommended acceptance of a Quit Claim Deed, BNSF quit claim deed from Sound Transit and approval of Sound Transit's request for Easement an easement across City -owned property located in the vicinity of Oakesdale Ave. SW and SW 27th St. with Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. Council concur. Transportation: I-405 Mainline Transportation Systems Division recommended concurrence with the Alignment Concurrence, Washington State Department of Transportation's 1-405 mainline alignment WSDOT from the western Renton City limit to SR-169. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Transportation: I-405/SR-167 Transportation Systems Division recommended concurrence with the Interchange 5% Design Washington State Department of Transportation's five percent design for the I - Concurrence, WSDOT 405 and SR-167 interchange. Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. Utility: Springbrook Creek Utility Systems Division recommended concurrence with the Washington State Wetland & Habitat Mitigation Department of Transportation regarding the creation of the Springbrook Creek Bank Concurrence, WSDOT Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. Refer to Utilities Committee. February 14, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 52 MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY CLAWSON, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council President Briere presented a Committee of the Whole report regarding Committee of the Whole the Pavilion Building lease. The Committee recommended moving forward Community Services: Pavilion with negotiations with the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train to utilize the Building Lease Pavilion Building as an event center. Staff will work with the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train to bring a proposal back for consideration. MOVED BY BRIERE, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning & Development Planning and Development Committee Chair Clawson presented a report Committee regarding the boundary expansion for the proposed Mosier II Annexation. A Annexation: Mosier II, 142nd public hearing on the Mosier II Annexation was held on 2/7/2005, after which Ave SE & 144th Ave SE, Council authorized staff to invoke jurisdiction at the Boundary Review Board Boundary Expansion to request expansion of the annexation area to more reasonable boundaries. The Committee, therefore, recommended that the referral regarding the Mosier II Annexation boundary expansion be closed. MOVED BY CLAWSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Community Services Community Services Committee Chair Nelson presented a report Committee recommending concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a contract Community Services: City with Richard C. Elliott, in the amount of $45,894.11, for his proposed work of Center Parking Garage art at the City Center Parking garage, and to approve the total project budget of Artwork, Richard C Elliott $52,774.11. The Committee further recommended that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the contract with Richard C. Elliott. MOVED BY NELSON, SECONDED BY PALMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Councilwoman Nelson stated that the artwork will be a beautiful addition to the parking garage, and it should be completed in approximately one year. Finance Committee Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending approval Finance: Vouchers of Claim Vouchers 234347 - 234897 and two wire transfers totaling $3,718,131.47; and approval of Payroll Vouchers 55668 - 55892, one wire transfer, and 572 direct deposits totaling $1,821,258.51. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY LAW, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Finance: Utility Outstanding Finance Committee Chair Persson presented a report recommending Balance Search Fees & Special concurrence in the staff recommendation to implement service fees for special Water Meter Read Service meter read, new utility account set up, and name change services. The Fees Committee also recommended concurrence in the staff recommendation to implement special service fees for utility outstanding balance searches. The Committee further recommended that the ordinances regarding these matters be presented for first reading.* Councilman Persson explained that title and escrow companies request utility outstanding balances from the City at the close of property sales, and a fee is proposed for providing this service. He noted that the Committee recommended increasing the staff -recommended fee from $10 to $25 for an Internet water utility balance search, and from $30 to $50 for a search requested by fax, messenger, or letter. February 14, 2005 Renton City Council Minutes Page 53 *MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL, CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See below for ordinances.) RESOLUTIONS AND The following ordinances were presented for first reading and referred to the ORDINANCES Council meeting of 2/28/2005 for second and final reading: Finance: Special Water Meter An ordinance was read adding Section 5-1-2.K to Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, of Read Service Fees Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) of City Code to adopt service fees for special meter readings, new utility account set up, and utility account transfers. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 2/28/2005. CARRIED. Finance: Utility Outstanding An ordinance was read amending Section 5-1-2.K to Chapter 1, Fee Schedule, Balance Search Fees of Title V (Finance and Business Regulations) of City Code to adopt service fees for utility outstanding balance searches. MOVED BY PERSSON, SECONDED BY CORMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE FOR SECOND AND FINAL READING ON 2/28/2005. CARRIED. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY LAW, SECONDED BY PERSSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 7:56 p.m. Bonnie 1. Walton, CMC, City Clerk Recorder: Michele Neumann February 14, 2005 RENTON CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETING CALENDAR Office of the City Clerk COUNCIL COMMITTEE MEETINGS SCHEDULED AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING February 14, 2005 **REVISED** COMMITTEE/CHAIRMAN DATE/TIME AGENDA COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE (Briere) COMMUNITY SERVICES (Nelson) FINANCE (Persson) PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (Clawson) PUBLIC SAFETY (Law) MON., 2/21 No Meeting (Presidents' Day) MON., 2/28 Police Sub -Station Tour 6:30 p.m. *Renton Transit Center* MON., 2/28 Vouchers; 5:30 p.m. Information Management Services Agreement with GM2 Systems; Claims Processing Fee Schedule with Healthcare Management Administrators THURS., 2/17 1:30 p.m. *MON., 2/28 (date change) 4:00 p.m. TRANSPORTATION (AVIATION) THURS., 2/17 (Palmer) 3:00 p.m Bremerton Street Vacation (briefing only); R-1 Zone Community Separators Critical Areas Ordinance Duvall Ave. Projects (briefing only); Bruce Levin Airport Lease Addendum; Kaynan, Inc. Airport Lease Addendum; Bosair, LLC Airport Lease Addendum; I-405/SR-167 Interchange 5% Design Concurrence Letter with WSDOT; I-405 Mainline Alignment Concurrence Letter with WSDOT UTILITIES THURS., 2/17 Springbrook Creek Wetland & Habitat (Corman) 4:00 p.m. Mitigation Bank Concurrence Letter with WSDOT NOTE: Committee of the Whole meetings are held in the Council Chambers. All other committee meetings are held in the Council Conference Room unless otherwise noted. CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: February 14, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council FROM: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer SUBJECT: Administrative In addition to our day-to-day activities, the following items are worthy of note for this week: GENERAL INFORMATION The Mayor will present the State of the City's Economy at a Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce luncheon on Monday, February 28`s, from 11:30 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at the Holiday Inn Select in Renton. Chamber members and non-members are welcome; tickets are $25 and $35, respectively. Registration is available online at www.renton-chamber.com. For residents or businesses interested in a free event, the Mayor will be joined by the Renton School District, Valley Medical Center, and Renton Technical College to present the State of the Community on Tuesday, March 29`s, from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Renton IKEA Performing Arts Center. Both presentations will be taped and re-cablecast on Channel 21 following the events. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT • Six teams of 54 Specialized Recreation athletes competed on Sunday, February 3`d, at the regional basketball tournament in Issaquah. Three teams (Unified Masters, Seniors, and Juniors), plus individual skill participants, were awarded first place and will now advance to the Washington State Special Olympics Winter Games next month in Wenatchee. PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT • At 7:15 a.m. on Wednesday, February 9d', a leak occurred in the 12-inch water main in the 4000 block of Sunset Blvd. Water to a number of customers was temporarily shut off while the City crew responded to the problem. Because of the volume of water, it was anticipated there might be a full main break. However, it was discovered that a cap had come off a 3/a-inch water line. Once it was repaired, water was restored to the customers and Sunset Blvd. was reopened by 3:45 p.m. • On Monday, February 7`h, a meeting was held with three North Renton residents to discuss increased truck traffic in North Renton. It seems truckers are using streets in North Renton that are not approved truck routes. Traffic tickets may be issued for this infraction. In addition, these residents expressed concerns about illegal parking along Meadow Avenue near Bronson Way. The Police and PBPW Departments are working with the neighbors to reduce unauthorized truck traffic in North Renton and to eliminate unlawful parking in the areas of concern. Stanley a ThylCis La Rue 2505 Wapfe VaffeyW ghway Denton, W-A 98058-2837 Phone. 425- 255- 3131 February 8, 2005 C/o Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Concerns about large cottonwood tree damming Cedar River below Riverview Park. Dear Council Members: CITY OF RENTON F E B 10 2005 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE On January 26, 2005, a very large cottonwood tree fell across the Cedar River onto our property at 2505 Maple Valley Highway in the City of Renton. This tree fell from the south bank of the river, Renton Riverview Park property, onto to the north bank of the river, our front yard. It completely blocks Cedar River from the south bank to the north bank, dams the river and blocks all boats or floaters from travel on the river. The Renton Fire Department has visited the site as has Mr. Mike Stenhouse of the Renton Street Department. Mr. Stenhouse has graciously agreed to contact suitable parties who may have an interest in disposing of this hazard to human life. To this date no one has contacted us concerning the removal of this hazard so we find it necessary to alert the City of Renton to the impending danger to human life as well as the tremendous liabilities to the City of Renton if this tree remains across the river and someone floating or boating the river gets trapped under the tree and drowns,( as nearly happened several times near this same site in June of 2001). Upstream a short distance from the Tree/Dam that now blocks passage on the Cedar River is a boat launch ramp at Riverview Park. This launching ramp for canoes, kayaks, float boats and inner tubes is a well known attraction in the City of Renton. Park Department literature advertises this attraction and it will become an "attractive nuisance" and a danger to human life. We are asking the Renton City Council to take an active part in seeing to the removal of this hazard soon. This dangerous situation will escalate as the weather becomes warmer and more people travel the river. Please feel free to contact us at any time for further information on this problem. Very truly yours, Stan an PhyllLa Rue % 14 1 ' ,��` �^<��( fit fY ° i rr ' •+r e� h'' `�. n ' w►'� ap77� f % _ 1� r>. Cam'` 4 tK .4,3 :YS';, 1' + i/`•• _ - `�• pii � r JjY •�� f w,g. - L. v�•{�'�� 'L. ".t+'�1 . �k'.. -'S' a "' _ � 7 y A 1•.M � . �; I. �. J s 1,4 J/F ,/' •l. � � � _ .,�., M ,� /a ' � �? i"" �' ..,L f, t _ • . , .. , 1 - - .r<, f.• '7 s:i�' .. .� :,•i _ rf I .R, -. '� �,C+.f ofw•• w+. .. . !� ray•' l 'y; Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board., Staff Contact...... CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al #: Fj AJLS/City Clerk Bonnie I. Walton Subject: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation dated 1/10/2005 regarding the Park Place Preliminary Plat. (File No. LUA-04-126, PP, ECF) Exhibits: A. City Clerk's letter (1/28/2005) B. Appeal - Heritage Homes (1/21/2005) C. Hearing Examiner's Report & Recommendation (1/ 10/2005) For Agenda of: 02/14/2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... In formation......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Legal Dept......... 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: Appeal of the Hearing Examiner recommendation on the Park Place Preliminary Plat was filed on 1/21/2005 by Michael Witek, Attorney, Representative for Heritage Homes, accompanied by the required $75 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council action on the Park Place Preliminary Plat and appeal. RentonnettapbilV bh 16 �-�- 17K Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor January 28, 2005 CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Bonnie I. Walton APPEAL FILED BY: Michael Witek, Attorney, Representative for Dave Parry, Heritage Homes RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's decision dated 1/10/2005 regarding the Heritage Homes application for a 2-lot subdivision of a 0.28-acre site for detached single-family homes, located at 620 South 23rd Street. (File No. LUA-04-126, PP, ECF) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's decision on the Park Place project has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110F, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of or opposition to the appeal within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of the notification of the filing of the appeal. The deadline for submission of additional letters is 5:00 p.m., Monday, February 7, 2005, at the City Clerk's office. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee at 2:00 p.m. on Thursday, April 7, 2005, in the Council Chambers, 71h floor of Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Attached is a copy of the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no new evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted b the . City Council. For additional information or assistance, please feel free to call. Sincerely, i Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Attachment cc: Council Liaison l 055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6510 / FAX (425) 430-6516 ® This paper contains 50 % recycled material, 30 % post consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE City of Renton Municipal Code; Title IV Chapter 8 Section 110 — Appeals 4-8-110C4 The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council — Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the filing of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the - -absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City. Council authorizing -new or --additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) ,;:�1iY OF RENTON cc: APPEAL - HEARING EXAMINER RECEN OFFICE WRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S DECISION/RECOMMENDI;41694ff RENTON CITY COUNCIL FILE NO: LUA 04-126, PP, ECF APPLICATION NAME: Park Place Preliminary Plat The undersigned interested party hereby files its Notice of Appeal from the decision or recommendation of the Land Use Hearing Examiner, dated January 10, 2005 1. 2. IDENTIFICATION OF PARTY APPELLANT: Name: Dave Parr Heritage Homes Address: 845 106th Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98004 Telephone No.: (253) 261-6873 REPRESENTATIVES: Name: Tim Hanson Hanson Consulting Address: 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Telephone No.: (360) 422-5056 Name: Michael Witek Helsell Fetterman LLP Address: 1001 4th Ave., #4200 Seattle, WA 98154 Telephone No.: (206) 689-2188 SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) Set forth below are the specific errors of law or fact upon which this appeal is based: FINDING OF FACT: (Please designate number as denoted in the Examiner's report) No. ,12 13 Error: Although they are really conclusions rather than true factual determinations, Findings of Fact 12 and 13 are in error to the extent they find that, "If the original short plat [for Park Place II] had been originally divided into 6 lots it would have had a density of 8.6 dwelling units per acre." Correction: Heritage Homes is the owner and developer of two properties within the City of Renton. These include Park Place I, a 0.479-acre parcel currently divided into 4 lots, and Park Place II, a 0.7 acre parcel recently divided into 5 lots via short plat. Heritage Homes purchased Park Place I and II after the previous owners had already submitted applications for short plat approval. The properties are located within the R-8 zoning district. This district permits residential densities of 8 dwelling units on parcels larger than 1/2 acre and 9.7 dwelling units per acre on parcels smaller than 1/2 acre. RMC 4-2-110A (Table of Development Standards). c d� q44-d rn ey 149&-rin.3 Cx4m1'ndr Page 1 of 3 The proposed preliminary plat at issue here would divide former Lot 1 of Park Place II into two lots. As the density calculations in the record (attached here as Exhibit A) demonstrate, dividing this 12,074-square-foot parcel into two lots would result in a net density of 7.2 units per acre. The Hearing Examiner has recommended denial because, in his view, the applicant is attempting to do something that could not have been permitted in the initial short plats -- namely, developing 6 lots on the Park Place II Property. This is simply not true. As the density calculations demonstrate, Park Place I is 0.479 acres, with a permitted density of 9.7 units per acre. Four units may be developed on Park Place I using only 0.42 acres (0.42 acres divided by 4 equals a density of 9.5 units per acre). The remaining 0.059 acres of Park Place I could have then been transferred via boundary line adjustment into Park Place II (0.7 acres), resulting in a total acreage of 0.759 acres (0.7 plus 0.059 equals 0.759). Developed with 6 lots, the density of Park Place II would be 7.9 units per acre (0.759 divided by 6 equals 7.9 units per acre). Through the current preliminary plat application, Heritage Homes seeks only to obtain a result that could have been obtained through the short plat process. This result would, in fact, be more consistent with the RMC because it states that densities of 5 to 8 units per acre are permitted in the R-8 zone "with the goal of obtaining_a density of eight (8) dwelling units per net acre." RMC 4-2-020(E) (emphasis added). With approval of the current proposed preliminary plat, the density would be 7.9 units per acre, as opposed to 7.14 units per acre if the preliminary plat is denied. CONCLUSIONS: No.1, 2 and3 Error: The Examiner erred in concluding that the proposal "does not serve the public use and interest" and that "it subverts the density requirements of the R-8 Zone and the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan" (Conclusion 1). The Examiner erred in concluding that "it is that division, the division of .7 acres into 5 discrete separate lots which governs this review. It is neither appropriate nor reasonable to seek out some other event ... to determine this proposed division ... [and that the application] "attempts to sidestep the density standards". (Conclusion 2). Finally, the Hearing Examiner erred in concluding that the application is "an inappropriate request," and that it should be denied "because it violates the underlying density standards" (Conclusion of Law 3). Correction: The Hearing Examiner erred in concluding that density must be determined solely with respect to the boundaries of the former Park Place H short plat. That is not a written requirement of the code, nor an "interpretation" of it, but instead is something that the Examiner seeks to write into the code himself. The Examiner goes beyond interpreting the code in this regard, and does not have the authority to impose his own modification to the code. As stated above, this preliminary plat application does not seek to "subvert" density standards. Park Place I and II could have been lawfully developed with a total of 10 lots (4 on Park Place I and 6 on Page 2 of 3 Park Place II) via the initial short plats. In fact, the proposed plat would be more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and zoning code, which state that the goal of the R-8 zone is to establish eight units per acre. The Examiner's decision should be reversed by the City Council as arbitrary, placing form over substance. 3. SUMMARY OF ACTION REQUESTED: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief: (Attach explanation, if desired) X Appellan Reverse the decision or recommendation and grant the following relief: Pursuant to RMC 4-8-110(F)(8), the Examiner's recommendation should be disregarded, and the Council should issue its own decision approving the preliminary plat. Modify the decision or recommen Remand to the Examiner for furth Other ve Signature as follows: ideration as follows: January 21, 2005 Date NOTE: Please refer to Title IV, Chapter 8, of the Renton Municipal Code, and Section 48-11 OF, for specific appeal procedures. gAg drivellu\parrylnotice of appeal.doc Page 3 of 3 HANSON CONSULTING ° roP� E �NN�� 360 422 5056 oN October 4, 2004 OCT j ' 2004 City of Renton . RECEIVED Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton WA. 98055 Subject: Park Place Preliminary Plat application, 2214 Smithers Ave S., Renton WA. Dear Development Services Staff: This letter outlines the application for the Park Place Preliminary Plat at 2214 Smithers Ave S. Renton WA. The proposal is to subdivide a 277 acre parcel into 2 residential lots. A foundation for a single family house is now on the site and will remain. The current zoning of the site and surrounding area is R-8. The current use of the site is currently vacant but for a foundation for a single family residence which will remain. The property fronts on S 23`d ST and Smithers Ave S. Access for the new lot will be from Smithers Ave S. Both Smithers Ave S and S 23`d ST are newly constructed streets as part of the Park Place Short Plat. All needed utilities are existing in the adjacent streets and have been stubbed into the new lot in anticipation of this application. The existing parcel is 12,074 square feet in size. One additional lot will be created. The lots will be more than the minimum of 4500 square feet. The density allowed is between 5 and 8 units per acre. The proposed density is 7.2 units per acre for this application subdividing the existing lot 1 of the Park Place Short Plat. (See Density Worksheet) The City staff has advised that even though this application meets the density regulations of the City. for subdivision of lot 1, we must look farther and meet the density requirements for the Park Place Short Plats. We have included two Density Calculations one for only lot 1 and another for both of the adjacent Park Place Short Plats. With considering both of the existing short plats the proposed density is 7.9 units per acre. We appreciate the city's review and approval of this application for a two lot subdivision. If you have any questions please contact me at 360422-5056. ZSi rely, James C. Hanson EXNl�IT A Park Place Preliminary Plat Construction Mitigation Plan DEV'ELOP C!7 y OF REM.(5NNING OCT l t 'voy RECEDED The following is a construction mitigation plan for the infrastructure associated with the Park Place Preliminary Plat. There will be no construction required since all requirements have been met as part of the newly constructed Park Place II Short Plat. All utilities have been stubbed into the new lot. A traffic control plan will not be needed. DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 88055 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax. 425430-7231 1. Gross area of property: O1��OP Cam' OF pe cc r 2004 PAP)-' s W_T P4A-S 1. / 2, 0 7 q square feet 2. Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include public roadways, private access easements serving 3 or more dwelling units, d s uare feet - and critical areas.* Total excluded area:** 2. q 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5: Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 3. lZ ; o 7 if square feet 4. . Z 7 % acres - 5. Z units/iots 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for not density: 6. 7, Z A.u./acre Z lots or units would result in a net density of dwelling units per acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations not including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deductedlexcluded. ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. 0_\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\For=\Planning\dcnsity.doc08/29/03 1 Park Place Preliminary Plat Density Calculations Park Place I = .479 Acres 4 lots Density allowed = 9.7 units per acre 4 divided by .42 acre = 9.5 units per acre. Density OK 479 acre - .42 acre (needed to meet density) = .059 acres (left over) Park Place II = .70 acre 5 lots + 1 new lot = 6 lots Density allowed = 8 units per acre .70 acre + .059 acre (left over) = .759 acre 6 divided by .759 = 7.9 units per acre. Density OK DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON OCT 1.1 2004 . RECEIVED Per the above density calculation, the density for the two Park Place short plats and the proposed Park Place Preliminary Plat meets the City of Renton development standards. January 10, 2005 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: Dave Perry Heritage Homes 845 106`h Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98004 CONTACT: Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Park Place Preliminary P\lat File No.: LUA 04-126, PP, ECF LOCATION: 620 South 23" d Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 2-lot subdivision of a 0.28-acre site intended for detached single-family homes. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on November 30, 2004. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the December 14, 2004 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, December 14, 2004, at 9:47 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No. 2: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Plat Plan Exhibit No. 4: Topography and Utility Plan Exhibit No. 5: Park Place I and 11 Short Plat Plan Exhibit No. 6: Zoning Map Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 2 The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. This site is located in the Talbot Hill area, north of S 23`d Street and east of Smithers Avenue South. The site is rectangular in shape, it previously was Lot 1 of Park Place 11 Short Plat, all properties are zoned R-8 residential single-family as well as a comprehensive land designation of Residential Single Family. The underlying short plat is Park Place 11, LUA 03-042 which was approved on June 10, 2004 and recorded on September 7, 2004. There is no current structure on the site, on proposed Lot 1 there is a foundation but no further construction has been done. Access to this site is proposed via South 23`d Street to Lot I and Lot 2 would be accessed from an existing access easement that currently serves Lots 4 and 5 of Park Place 11. The proposed density for the 28-acre site with no deductions would be 7.2 dwelling units per acre. The subject site was recently short platted for 5 lots. Exhibit 5 illustrates the other short plats, Park Place I is furthest to the east of this proposed site. It includes four lots on a .48-acre site, the density was 8.3 du/acre which was allowed. The Park Place 11 included five lots on the .7-acre site had a density of 7.1 du/acre which was permitted under the R-8 zoning. If the applicant had proposed six lots within this short plat of which Lot 1 is proposed to be further divided, six lots on the .7-acre site would have been greater than the permitted density of 8 du/acre, that density would have been 8.6 du/acre. Staff is recommending denial as the applicant is attempting to achieve a higher density than what the code allows by subsequent land use applications. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated, including three mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. Lots l and 2 equal or exceed the minimum of 4,500 square feet. The smallest lot, Lot 1 is 5,793 square feet, both lots comply with the lot dimension requirements. The proposal's compliance with these setback standards will be verified prior to the issuance of individual building permits. It appears that they do comply with the setback standards. Each detached dwelling would be required to provide two off-street parking stalls, the building pads appear to be adequately sized for this provision. Each lot satisfied the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-8 zone. No additional street improvements are required. Single family residential surrounds the subject site, the detached single-family homes on these two lots would be compatible, however, the two additional lots would over densify the existing neighborhood. A Fire Mitigation Fee was proposed on the plat. The site is located within the Renton School District and they are able to handle the additional student. Storm drainage facilities exist in Smithers Avenue South and in South 23`d Street. The applicant would be required to tightline to the new storm conveyance system. Water and sanitary mains exist in South 23`d Street and Smithers Avenue South. Water stubs are required to be installed to each new lot prior to recording the short plat. Staff recommends denial of the park Place Preliminary Plat. Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 3 Jim Hanson, Hanson Consulting, 17446 Mallard Cove Lane, Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 stated that they do agree with the staff report in that the proposed preliminary plat meets all the requirements of the City's subdivision ordinance and zoning code with the exception of the issue of overall density. There were discussions with the City of Renton about a way of further subdividing this property, this particular owner bought the property after the short plat application and been approved and in the process of being developed. The density allowed in the R-8 zone is 8 units per net acre and for this size parcel it meets the density at 7.2 du/ac. It is not a re -plat, it is a preliminary plat of Lot 1 of the previous short plat. Regarding the easement, it was intended to serve Lots 4 and 5 for access, shown as new Lot 2 along Smithers Avenue could access from Smithers Avenue. In many short plats the City has asked applicants not to put in another driveway, but to use a shared driveway, therefore, it is not really an easement to Lot 2, but a shared driveway. Two density calculations were provided, one showing the density for Lot I of the short plat that shows the density requirement being met at 7.2 du/ac. Another density calculation for a neighborhood by taking the two adjacent short plats, which are owned by the same party, Park Place I had a density of 9.7, Park Place 11 had a density of 8, both of those met density. If you take the neighborhood density by combining the two, they still meet a density of less than 8 du/ac. The City's subdivision ordinance, Section 47.080 C states that if there is land in common ownership then you cannot go through a short plat, but a preliminary plat, but it doesn't say you need to include the common land. They believe they meet the zoning standards and sub division standards for this two -lot preliminary plat. The F,RC reviewed the impact of an additional lot and found there was no substantial impact for adding an additional lot. Michael P. Witek, 1001 Fourth Avenue, Suite 4200, Seattle, WA 98154 stated that the real question is how density is calculated. If this proposal is looked at in isolation, it complies with the density requirements. The project complies with all of the other regulations. It appears that staff is going beyond the subject site and looking at a broader area, how broad do we look. The Examiner stated that the only issue is density. It is one of the criteria, all other things aside, if code is not met then you don't meet code. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:45 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: l . The applicant, Dave Perry, Heritage Homes, filed a request for a Preliminary Plat. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit 41. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 4 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at 620 South 23rd Street. 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of single-family uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-8 (Single Family - 8 dwelling units/acre). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 3316, enacted in May 1979. 9. The applicant proposes dividing a 0.28-acre parcel into two lots. Normally, this type of subdivision, dividing one lot into two lots, would be a short plat. The fact that the property proposed for division was itself the result of a short plat approved within last five (5) years, requires a full Preliminary Plat under State and City regulations. The short plat Nvas recorded on September 7. 2004 under Recording Number 20040907900011. 10. RCW 58.17.060 provides that: Short plats and short subdivisions -- Summary approval -- Regulations -- Requirements. (1) The legislative body of a city, town, or county shall adopt regulations and procedures, and appoint administrative personnel for the summary approval of short plats and short subdivisions or alteration or vacation thereof. When an alteration or vacation involves a public dedication, — the alteration or vacation shall be processed as provided in RCW or. Such regulations shall be adopted by ordinance and shall provide that a short plat and short subdivision may be approved only if written findings that are appropriate, as provided in RCW, are made by the administrative personnel, and may contain wholly different requirements than those governing the approval of preliminary and final plats of subdivisions and may require surveys and monumentations and shall require filing of a short plat, or alteration or vacation thereof, for record in the office of the county auditor: PROVIDED, That such regulations must contain a requirement that land in short subdivisions may not be further divided in any manner within a period of five years without the filing of a final plat, except that when the short plat contains fewer than four parcels, nothing in this section shall prevent the owner who filed the short plat from filing an alteration within the five-year period to create up to a total of four lots within the original short plat boundaries: PROVIDED FURTHER, That such regulations are not required to contain a penalty clause as provided in RCW and may provide for wholly injunctive relief. The Renton Municipal Code Section 4-7-070.C.2 provides similar language with the following requirements: 1. Short Plat Process Applicable to Division into Nine (9) or Less Lots: Any land being divided into nine (9) or less parcels, lots, tracts, sites, or subdivisions, including segregations, and which has not been divided in a short subdivision within a period of five (5) years, shall meet the requirements of this Section. 2. Preliminary Plat Required for Certain Divisions: No application for a short subdivision shall be approved if the land being divided is held in common ownership with a contiguous parcel which has been divided in a short subdivision within the Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 5 preceding five (5) years. Such applications must be processed as preliminary plat, rather than a short plat. 1 1. The original short plat subdivided 0.70 acres into five (5) lots. That five -lot short plat had a density of 7.1 dwelling units per acre. 12. Staff noted that if the original short plat had been originally been divided into 6 lots it would have had a density of 8.6 dwelling units per acre. The R-8 Zone permits lots over 0.5 acres to have a density which can range from 5 to 8 dwelling units per acre. Staff noted that the proposed plat would not meet the original code requirements for this site. 13. Dividing Lot 1's existing 0.28 acres into two lots as proposed would result in a density of 7.2 dwelling units per acre. Staff suggested that because this proposal is considered a Preliminary Plat, it encompasses the entire original acreage and then reviewed for compliance with density standards. 14. The subject site is generally flat. It was cleared of vegetation under the prior short plat approval. 15. The two new lots as Nvell as the former lots are rectangular and their property lines are generally at right angles to the street. 16. Access to the interior parcels, Lots 4 and 5 of the original short plat, are via an easement. That easement would also provide access to Proposed Lot 2 of this new plat to limit the driveways along Smithers Avenue South. 17. The subject site is located within the Renton School District. The project is expected to generate approximately one school age child assigned on a space available basis. 18. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit. 19. There would be little change to the utility needs of the one additional lot and subsequent home. CONCLUSIONS: I . The proposed plat does not serve the public use and interest. It subverts the density requirements of the R-8 Zone and the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan in setting those density guidelines. There is one reason the proposed division of property into two lots has to be reviewed as a Preliminary Plat and is not considered a short plat. That reason is that the lot proposed for division was itself created by a short plat recorded within the last five (5) years, actually, within the last 6 months. Since the triggering act was the division approved on June 10, 2004 (File Number LUA-03-042) and recorded on September 7, 2004 (Recording Number 20040907900011), the only logical way to view this plat is to look at that most recent division. It is that division, the division of 0.7 acres into five discrete separate lots which governs this review. It is neither appropriate nor reasonable to seek out some other event or subdivision or ownership question either recent or more distant to determine this proposed subdivision. The lot now proposed for division was created by the short plat of 0.70 acres. That is the property and that is the acreage that needs to be considered in this review. Taking that entire 0.70 acres and dividing it into 6 lots results in a density of 8.6 dwelling units per acre. That violates the density standards of the R-8 Zone. So while it appears that the proposal presents some unique issues, it merely presents a direct assault on the density standards enacted by the City Council. It attempts to sidestep the density standards by initially short platting acreage that would have been insufficient for a six -lot plat into a five Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 6 lot plat and then, shortly thereafter, attempting to re -divide one of those lots in that initially insufficient parcel. It is an inappropriate request. 3. The Proposed Preliminary Plat should be denied by the City Council since it violates the underlying density standards of the City's Zoning Code and Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council should deny the Preliminary Plat. ORDERED THIS 10'h day of January 2005. �j ---a �31�"' ��, FRED J. KAUTNAN HEARING EXAMINER TRANSMITTED THIS 10`h day of January 2005 to the parties of record: Susan Fiala 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Jim Hanson Dave Perry Heritage Consulting 845 1061h Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98004 Hanson Consulting Michael P. Witek 17446 Mallard Cove Lane Attorney Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 1001 Fourth Avenue, Ste. 4200 Seattle, WA 98154 TRANSMITTED THIS 10`' day of January 2005 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Larry Warren, City Attorney Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Kayren Kittrick 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Stan Engler, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services King County Journal Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 100Gof the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., January 24, 2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the Park Place Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-126, PP, ECF, January 10, 2005 Page 7 discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., January 24, 2005 If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. KM IE CA CA F3 - 18 T23N R5E E 1/2 CA A m His [... TH.- rs d Rd ICA CA S Rento i Village Pl. f Co Co J IOD oq Od I --:I I rs — 19th J) 67 R-1 CIO S 21st I Nwo R -, - -FRa - -1 H3 - 30 T23N R5E E 1/2 G3. O ZOMNG - - - - R..f- &AY U..H* P'/WM TECENW-AL SM'VIM 19 T23N R5E E 1/2.- 010 (a l 607 A .---��- T M' 7i -' if 1- JI t 7Rk Renton School PARK PLACE PRELIMINARY P A r R K • C:tsi of/Renton i LAT OTY OF RENTON RENTON, WASHINGTON THE ONNCRS Or LAND 4MPRAf2'D 10170 TINS SNORT PUT, W RCIIARN FOR RAC BCIArnt$ TO ACME FROU W SLL DA45 9 BY SIGAWO NERCON COKNANTS AND AGRCC$ TO OiVWY WE W070u1. LVTCRRT W INC NEW 11AS110017S SNOAN ON TNS SNORT PLAT 70 ANY AND ALL MARC P4,1010 UITS Or PC LOTS OR Ltr ANY.T(A6DJNSKWS 7N[IfCO. RNS CDLENANT quit RUN NTN RAC LAho AS "m LW RN$ LADRT . PLAT. CERTIFICATION KNOW ALL PEOPLE NY TH9$C aRpMT1 tint t the YMsnoorW airs sf Inl-rel In Ns lend Aws.y ~ "'I'd se horNy took. 0.4 wWM.Nn th—W. d.Mn this mse N be the RrwkM nors..nletNn .f th. rams, ass th.t short-NeMrlrn I. mass MIA N. eve eMW Pod In evoordo oo with the desire d the eewery N -TIRES$ vMacOF w sN ew h-,d.. 4 r". NERITAGC N(RIES, NC. BANNER BAN( A WAS40107011 CORPORAIM OF WASHINGTON ) ( OF KING ) On this __ soy of -^�-, 20-.,, Personally oppeored to me known to be the of the corporation that executed foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged the said Instrument to be the free and voluntary oat and deed of add corporation, lor the uses and purposes therein mention, and on oath stated that he/she was duly authorized to execute lhs said Instrument and that the seal affixed Is the corporott seat of said corporation. Wetness my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written Notary Public In and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My Appointment Expires Date OF WASHINGTON ) ( OF KIND ) On thla day of - 20--, persanaBy :,peered to me known to be the of the oerporatlon that xecuted foregoing Instrument, and acknowledged the sold Instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of sold corporation, for the uses coal purposes thersln mention, and on oath stated that he/she was duly authorized to execute the sold Instrument and that the seal ofOxed is the corporutt seol of void corporation. Witness my hand and ofOeiol seal hereto affixed the day and year first above written Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) My Appointment Expires Dale APPROVALS: CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING/ BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS Txamh.d and .09—d this — day or __ 20_- RECORDING NO. i U—Ined void W v" this — day of 20— A ..... - —' I SCALE; Red for record this_doy of 20_ at_ N i book -of -at page_ at the request 'f Mounlr H. Tour7tg_ Mgr. Sup , of Records A*.N."te, D.Pvty, A..,..W PORTION OF Aoeoant Number 722200-0093 SE 1 /4 of LEGEND I su 1A. REPAR k C LS p.10 --- O IFOUND PIPE/REBAR • RpINID MOIL IN CASE TL 07222000101 6 36�ON W CASE I I 20' C%KL7ouaTER CORNER I200 OUOU+SECT& CORNER I FOUND BRASS DISK W/PUNCH IN CASE (03/03) ' 1 I JOADID1170 L RW I ?A7 2 1r e < �• A. + 3 I I J 257 ' 15' I UNPLikrED ZQ_PRIVATE INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT ACROSS LOTS 1 AND S. 6"1.26- E e IL (♦uNP`AooED SURVEY NOTES VOL/PACE N ,>e asb - SO ft. 19T.23NR.5EW,M. INSTRUMENT. NIKON TOTAL STATION DTMAIOLG METHOD USED; FIELD TRAVERSE PATH ACTUAL FIELD MEASUREMENTS AND ANGLES WAC 332-130-000 DATE Or SURVEY: MARCH 2O03 BASIS OF BEARING.' SOUTH LINE OF THE SE 1/4 OF SEC 19-23-5 N 89,56,56, W ......• ••.....I •.............r ,-------------- LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1 I LOT 5 Or THE CITY Or RENTON SHORT PLAT NO. 1 I LUA-03-012-SNPL ACCORDING TO THE SHORT PLAT THEREOF I RECORDED IN KING UNDER RECORDING NO. C 5 4 y� SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON. COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF R 2 < WASHINGTON ^ 3 a ADDRESS 5,280. soft. 0.14 apes I in G. LOT 1 - 2218 SMITHERS AVE. SOUTH L - - - - - - - J ^ A. LOT 5 - 22XX SMITHERS AVE, SOIUTH NOTES Sd871767 1. SUBJECT TO RESERVATIONS AND OTHER 6500' N U MATTERS CONTAINED IN DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 631895. OL LOCATION. PLAT DATA Ki TOTAL SHORT PLAT AREA - 12,070 SOFT, I 1 NUMBER OF LOTS - 2 I I v�i LOT AREAS - 1 3790 SORT 5,793. sa•fl. 1 2 - 6280 SO.FT 1 0,13 apes 1 PROPOSED DENSITY - 7.2 I I Q ZONING - R8 RESIDENTIAL R L - U0d . 13.eJ' 2'WATER EASEMENT REC NO. 5301205 PRIVATE EASEMENT 'A SOUTH 2Jrd STREET SS E.Isti%N�MR�W Is .- 016.66' (MEAS) 616.67 (PUT 185-30) �NEWP��CUS AI T T 7HE ONN&S K LOIS A AND S SMALL MAW AN COVAL AND VAIDA ED AWEREST W THE ONNCRSW AND RCSPONSI UTY FOR MAINTENANCE Or INE NBOU-56-W 265A26'(4EAS)265A26 (KCAS) (PAWS Or B7i., PMVAIr ACCESS AND UTEJTY CASID"T APPIAPIENANCES. THEM A fX2vv SCC Ty-1JN-SC t"Y NSPZ8'061W 20AJI'(Qak) YS ig APPURTENANCES AND JAAMCNANCE RCSIOMSWWS iNawr RMC REPAIR AND AMAW IENANCC a RAC PMVAIE AC= ROA4 ORANAAOC PFES ANO t SW 2YO ST OTY or IMw 11160 nRAVO 1/Y BRA$$ Sr CORNER SE STOW NN 7" gMUTY AO/LV DETENTION FAOURCS Wpm TAPS CLUU&T,, A%NVAIr ST IMCC Alp OMP MY7IASTMXAW MOT 09NED BY Da WFMWCN W COW tol r . pry or RENTON %2,70 7W CITY Or VIVrY RiMKWO N J74S7SB7Jd' W/COOP£R TACK W CASE SHALL BE SNARED WALLY ON IIN KPAWNG IN W ACCESS uuJI CASEMENT 1$ PRCYA61= CKM PAVEMENT INORI AT GW Mt TNAN }0 [ 1,I97,04SdJlr FOUND BRASS DISK N 17457S4269 aU (ECT W/PUNCH CASE (03/03) C LJ04$-27470 Thlsvmop correctly represents a survey mode PARK PLACE PRELIMINARY PLAT %Q by me or under my direction In conformance are (%1:�A ENGINEERS 2214 SMITHERS AVENUE SOUTH with the requirements of the Survey Recording g dC LANO SURVEYORS RENTON,W ASHINGTON Act at the request of HArdoge Homes. Inc. g M g NEST VAUXY CWCURL£ PARK OWN. BY DATE N In March, 2004 �,, I Wj, N_1� 66M SOM 1%ST PUC( SWIG C-107 -KWT WA aM0.I2 DAN T. MARCH. 2001 79M^TtP.DHG �jJA,e11e,L �wd►� 1n-- rwwC (uv }a1_oaa FAX (Asa) Tar-oMza -- Tf'• L� OHKD. BY SCALE SH C.rNrtenl. kin. 047(1 ~ WHT 1' - 30' iF 1 15 10 ► , _ 1 1 owl 4' i �o► Imo, 1� :6 s if Co M; C ° .1 otll�% s , r i Of _ U)_ 1 t 1 1 1 ► �., o ► � 1 15, ► 1 � 1 U� 165..OW 63.00'' 50.00' A =------------ ---- --------------r - T ----10' PRIVAT S 5' _ �-• EASUENT F0 1••••— 5• ..,. 1 &NERT OF Lt r, 4,581. sq.ft. �i 4►581 sq.ft. o, 0.11 acres 1"_: 0.11 acres a 12,074. sq.ft. 0.27 acres 2214 SMITHERS { EX. = t HOUSE FOUNDATION 1540SF� 7.81' L*L .7 H_j QELTA-917V30" 15.00' 23.93 T.. 49_.64' N-----=- i ► 1 ► 50.00' S 8871'26" E 7.53' V 2 4,674. sq.ft. 0.10 acres 50.02' Of 149., r 50. 00, $ 883J'26" E N 4,612. sq.ft, 0 y 0.10 acres - j-___50.0E' - -- UNPLATTEO .... 1, 57.50' \ \ NI \ \ 5 -------------------------------- ;�---10' PRI VA TE U77L/T Y 5'--A-- CASEMENT FOR ALL 5'--1 LOTS 1 , I 1 3 = 1 5,251. sq.ft, 0.12 acres ,.. 5,215, sq.ft. P= 1 0.11 acres � 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 •1 1 i 57. ,, S 89108'W E S 89'08'45' E 1 1 1 � 1 2 1 1 1 1 5,245. sq.ft ` 6 ' q• 1 °D 1 5,199, sq.ft. 0.12 acres a " g i✓ 0.11 acres �g 1 1 1 1 � 1010, � , 1 1 1 1 Se S-7 ikl 57.52' ®� S89U*56"E 115.049 SouT1-1 23rd STREET PARK PLACE I, .479 ACRES s N 616.65' (MEAS) 616.67 (PLAT 185-30) PM LA 1-L .70. ACIr '- rARK PLACE PP, .27 ACRES Lvf - .. of PP2 N8856'56'w 2sF.2s:(kEA.S1..Z65,9.26 (KCAS) MAWS of BE CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al H: e Submitting Data: For Agenda of: 02/14/2005 Dept/Div/Board.. AJLS/City Clerk Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Bonnie I. Walton Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. Subject: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation dated Correspondence.. 1/18/2005 regarding the Amberwood Phase II Ordinance ............. Preliminary Plat. (File No. LUA-04-117, PP) Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: A. City Clerk's letter (2/4/2005) Study Sessions...... B. Appeal — Steve Beck (2/1/2005) Information......... C. Hearing Examiner's Report & Recommendation (1 /18/2005 Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Planning and Development Committee. Legal Dept......... 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: Appeal of the Hearing Examiner recommendation on the Amberwood Phase II Preliminary Plat was filed on 2/l/2005 by Steve Beck, represented by Amy L. Kasterlitz, Attorney, accompanied by the required $75 fee. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council action on the Amberwood Phase II Preliminary Plat and appeal. Rentonnet/agnbill/ bh CITY OF RENTON t"R City Clerk Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor Bonnie I. Walton February 4, 2005 APPEAL FILED BY: Steve Beck, represented by Amy L. Kosterlitz, Attorney RE: Appeal of Hearing Examiner's recommendation dated 1 / 18/2005 regarding subdivision of a 4.24 acre parcel located at 6135 NE 4th Street into 17 single-family lots, known as the Amberwood Phase II Preliminary Plat. (File No. LUA-04-117, PP, ECF, R) To Parties of Record: Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Renton City Code of Ordinances, written appeal of the hearing examiner's recommendation on the Amberwood Phase II Preliminary Plat application has been filed with the City Clerk. In accordance with Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 OF, within five days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. Other parties of record may submit letters limited to support of their positions within ten (10) days of the date of mailing of the notification of the filing of the appeal. The deadline for submission of additional letters is February 14, 2005. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the written appeal and other pertinent documents will be reviewed by the Council's Planning and Development Committee. ` The Council Liason will notify all parties of record of the date and time of the Planning and Development Committee meeting. If you are not listed in local telephone directories and wish to attend the meeting, please call the Council Liason at 425-430-6501 for information. The recommendation of the Committee will be presented for consideration by the full Council at a subsequent Council meeting. Attached are a copy of the appeal and a copy of the Renton Municipal Code regarding appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions or recommendations. Please note that the City Council will be considering the merits of the appeal based upon the written record previously established. Unless a showing can be made that additional evidence could not reasonably have been available at the prior hearing held by the Hearing Examiner, no further evidence or testimony on this matter will be accepted by the City Council. For additional information or assistance, please feel free to call me at 425-430-6502. Sincerely, &t4V_g v 6dae� Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Attachments cc: Council Liason 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425) 430-6510 / FAX (425) 430-6516 MThf.� saner rnntains 50 % recvcled material. 30 % cost consumer RENTON AHEAD OF THE CURVE City of Renton Municipal Code,• Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110 — Appeals 4-8-110C4 , The notice of appeal shall be accompanied by a fee in accordance with RMC 4-1-170, the fee schedule of the City. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-82) 4-8-110F: Appeals to City Council — Procedures 1. Time for Appeal: Unless a specific section or State law providing for review of decision of the Examiner requires review thereof by the Superior Court or any other body, any interested party aggrieved by the Examiner's written decision or recommendation may submit a notice of appeal to the City Council, upon a form furnished by the City Clerk, within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Examiner's written report. 2. Notice to Parties of Record: Within five (5) days of receipt of the notice of appeal, the City Clerk shall notify all parties of record of the receipt of the appeal. 3. Opportunity to Provide Comments: Other parties of record may submit letters in support of their positions within ten (10) days of the dates of mailing of the notification of the fling of the notice of appeal. 4. Transmittal of Record to Council: Thereupon the Clerk shall forward to the members of the City Council all of the pertinent documents, including the written decision or recommendation, findings and conclusions contained in the Examiner's report, the notice of appeal, and additional letters submitted by the parties. (Ord. 3658, 9-13-1982) 5. Council Review Procedures: No public hearing shall be held by the City Council. No new or additional evidence or testimony shall be accepted by the City Council unless a showing is made by the party offering the evidence that the evidence could not reasonably have been available at the time of the hearing before the Examiner. If the Council determines that additional evidence is required, the Council shall remand the matter to the Examiner for reconsideration and receipt of additional evidence. The cost of transcription of the hearing record shall be borne by the applicant. In the absence of an entry upon the record of an order by the City Council authorizing new or additional evidence or testimony, and a remand to the Hearing Examiner for receipt of such evidence or testimony, it shall be presumed that no new or additional evidence or testimony has been accepted by the City Council, and that the record before the City Council is identical to the hearing record before the Hearing Examiner. (Ord. 4389, 1-25-1993) 6. Council Evaluation Criteria: The consideration by the City Council shall be based solely upon the record, the Hearing Examiner's report, the notice of appeal and additional submissions by parties. 7. Findings and Conclusions Required: If, upon appeal of a decision of the Hearing Examiner on an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050FI, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, it may remand the proceeding to Examiner for reconsideration, or modify, or reverse the decision of the Examiner accordingly. 8. Council Action: If, upon appeal from a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner upon an application submitted pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F2 and F3, and after examination of the record, the Council determines that a substantial error in fact or law exists in the record, or that a recommendation of the Hearing Examiner should be disregarded or modified, the City Council may remand the proceeding to the Examiner for reconsideration, or enter its own decision upon the application. 9. Decision Documentation: In any event, the decision of the City Council shall be in writing and shall specify any modified or amended findings and conclusions other than those set forth in the report of the Hearing Examiner. Each material finding shall be supported by substantial evidence in the record. The burden of proof shall rest with the appellant. (Ord 3658, 9-13-1982) 10. Council Action Final: The action of the Council approving, modifying or rejecting a decision of the Examiner shall be final and conclusive, unless appealed within the time frames established under subsection G5 of this Section. (Ord. 4660, 3-17-1997) 02/01/05 09:28 PAX 206 626 0675 BUCK & GORDON LLP APPEAL - HEARMG EXAMINER 0002 301=HO SN83-10 1110 WRITTEN AF'>''M OF HEAMNQ EXAMDrF Z`S DECISION'%RECOM:MFNAATTON TO PZNTM COUNCIL. F112 NO. zvA 04-117, PP, ELF, R _ _ 900Z L 0 83J)5 APPUCATMON XAM S: A1BFhi W XUAM 11 . �•�� 5 ' N01:11 -40 kilo The twderaigned intometed party hereby $Ies its Notice of Appeal from the dcaiisioa or -recommmendatkm of the, hand Use Hearing Examiner, dated---_____;.lanuar 1$ 2p o5 1. In c oN OF PARTY APPELLANT: NaDLe; Steve Beck Ad :4735 HE 4th Street, Renton WA 98059 Telephone No. ( 425) 444-0461 KF. ENTATra "ANY) Tj `Amy 1. Kosterlitz, Buck & Gordon LLP }ddrm8; 2025 First Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle WA 98121 Telephune No. (206) 382-9540 2. SPECIFIGL'n0N OF ERRORS (Attafih additional shects, if necessary) Set forth below are tht spacatic errors or law or feet upon which this appeal is basod: 2+'INDINQr OF FAdT: (Please deeigoate;=ber its denoted in the R=ninees•report] No. Etror._„�T+R A'J!'racHFn Correction: CONCLUSIONS: No. HkTor: SEE ATTACHED Cor ecHn ; No._ Eanr: CoZrecion: 3. _S&MM QF=og 12Ep The relieL Attach ��Oi t9' Cauriar'1 is requested to grant the faflowirlg ( explanation, if desired) K Revme tho dadaim n"A Zraat the follo9949 Yelieh See Attached Modify the decidm ar MODMmendatiou as follows: - - - Remand to the der for fartber aonsidetrafl= as follows: - er N Fphr»gry Z 2005 pclIant/Represeutativ� Sigpattuo Date MOtR: PlBaao refer to Title IV, Chopter it, of the Ren�on "jofpej tbdo, etd sootjoh 4-9.11oF, fer;,epecitfo appeal CE 1- PGytH �JC4�lIA79 RECEI2D �2005-FEB-01 09:23AM FROM-206 626 0675 TO -John L Scott Renton PAGE 002 02/01/05 09:29 FAX 206 626 0675 BUCK & GORDON LLP t1003 1NRITTEN APPEAL OF HEARING EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION TO RENTON CITY COUNCIL FILE NO. LUA 04-117, PP, ECF, R 2. SPECIFICATION OF ERRORS Set forth below are the specific errors of law and fact upon which this appeal is based: FMING OF FACT: No. 6 Eaor: Finding 6 fails to state that at the time the applicant submitted this plat application allowable low density included 1Z 5 zoning. Correction: Find that the map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of low -density residential uses, including uses compatible with R 5 zoning. Error: Finding 11 fails to state that the applicant agrees to abide by the SEPA mitigation measures. Conection: Find that the applicant agrees to abide by all SEPA mitigation measures. No. 21 En -or. Finding 21 fails to state that the properties surrounding the subject parcel have been developed at R-5 densities. Correction: Find that parcels man ending the subject site have been developed at R-5 densities. No. 23 fir. Finding 23 fails to state that the applicant agrees to plant two trees in the front yard of each lot. Correction: Find that the applicant agrees to plant two trees in the front yard of each lot. NR. 24 Error Finding 24" fails to state that R 5 was an appropriate density for the subject site at the time the applicant submitted this plat application Conection: Find that R 5 was an appropriate density for the subject site at the time the applicant submitted this plat application. RECEIVED 2005-FEB-01 09:23AM FROM-206 626 0675 TO -John L Scott Renton PAGE 003 02/01/05 09:29 FAI 206 626 0675 BUCK & GORDON LLP Ia004 CONCLUSION (Note: Decision calls these Recommendations): No. 1 Error. Conclusion 1 inappropriately construes the rezone criteria Correction: Conclude that the City Council should approve the proposed reclassification of the subject site from R 1 to R-5 because the applicant has satisfied the rezone criteria found in Section 4-9-180F. No. 2 Error: Conclusion 2 erroneously interprets and applies the law governing vesting and nonconforming uses. Correetion: Conclude that the applicant has a vested right to request a rezone of the subject site to R-S. Conclude that a rezone of the subject site to R 5 is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan and rezone criteria and the R 5 development already established in the area. No. 3 Fro : Conclusion 3 inappmptiately applies the criteria for a rezone to conclude that R-4 is a more appropriate density than R 5. Conclusion 3 also misinterprets the Comprehensive Plan. Correction: Conclude that a rezone of the subject site to R-5 is appropriate given the R-5 development already established in the area. Conclude that R-5 is a low residential density and is consistent with the Comprehensive plan and rezone criteria No. 4 $rror. Conclusion 4 misinterprets the public interest and erroneously applies the law governing nonconforming uses. Correction; Conclude that it is in the public interest to rezone the subject site to R-5 to allow for development consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and rezone criteria and the development already established in the area No. 5 Error: It is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner to propose a rezone to R-4. R-4 zoning was not available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. C�i'o : Recommend a rezone of the subject site to R 5. 1%LQ. 6 Error. It is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Remring Examiner to propose a rezone to RA R4 zoning was not available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. Conclusion 6 is also legally and factually inaccurate. Correction: Conclude that a rezone of the subject site to R-5 is appropriate given the R-5 development already established in the area. Conclude that R 5 is a low residential density and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and rezone criteria. RECEIVED 2005-FEB-01 09:23AM FROW206 626 0675 TO -John L Scott Renton PAGE 004 02/01/05 09:29 FAX 206 626 0675 BUCK & GORDON LLP tO 005 No. 7 Error. Conclusion 7 erroneously interprets Comprehensive Plan objectives. Correction: Conclude that R 5 is a low residential density and is consistent with Comprehensive Plan objectives and rezone criteria. . No. 8 Error: It is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner to propose a rezone to R-4. R-4 zoning was npt available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. Conclusion 7 also misapplies the "materially detrimental" standard. Correction: Conclude that a rezone of the subject site to R 5 would not be materially detrimental to either the public welfare or other properties in the area No. 9 Error: R is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner to propose a rezone to R-4. R-4 zoning was not available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. Correction: Conclude that a rezone of the subject site to R 5 is appropriate given the R 5 development already established in the area. Conclude that R-5 is a low residential density and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and rezone criteria. No. 10 Error. It is beyond the scope of jtuisdictiou of the Hearing Axautiner to propose a rezone to R-4. R-4 zoning was not available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. _ - -Correction: Conclude,that R 5 would increase the density potential of the subject site and talce advantage of the new infrastructure. No. 11 Error: It is beyond the scope of jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner to propose a rezone to R-4. R-4 zoning was not available at the time the applicant submitted the plat application and was not requested by the applicant or the City. Correction: Recommend a rezone of the subject site to R 5. &o. 12 Error. Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and factual errors cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation that the subject site be rezoned to R 5. No. 13 E or: Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and factual ermrs cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation that the subject site be rezoned to R 5. 3 RECEIVED 2005-FES-01 09:23AM FROM-206 626 06T5 TO -John L Scott Renton PAGE 005 02/01/05 09:29 FAX 206 626 0675 BUCK & GORDON LLP U 006 No. 14 Error: Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and facttal errors cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation that the subj cot site be rezoned to R 5. No. 15 Error: Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and factual errors cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation that the subject site be rezoned to iz 5. No. 16 Error. Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and factual errors cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation that the subject site be rezoned to R 5. No. 19 Error: Conclusion 12 is improper given the legal and factual errors cited above. Correction: Conclude that the proposed Preliminary Plat is appropriate given the above recommendation the the subject site be rezoned to R-5. SUA0 ARY OF ACTION REMMTID: The City Council is requested to grant the following relief. Reverse the recommendation and grant the following relies = Rezone of the -- subject site to R-5 and approval of the -proposed Preliminary Plat. - 4 RECEIVED 2005-FEB-01 09:23AM FROW206 626 06T5 TO -John L Scott Renton PAGE 006 January 18, 2005 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON Minutes APPLICANT: Steve Beck Amberwood 11 LLC 4735 NE 41h Street Renton, WA 98059 OWNER: Bales Limited Partnership PO Box 3015 Renton, WA 98056 Amberwood LLC 4735 NE 4'h Street Renton, WA 98059 File No.. LUA 04-117, PP, ECF, R LOCATION: 6135 NE 4'h Street SUMMARY OF REQUEST: Approval for a 17-lot subdivision of a 4.24-acre site intended for detached single-family homes and a Rezone to R-5. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve subject to conditions DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on November 30, 2004. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report, examining available information on file with the application, field checking the property and surrounding area; the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the December 14, 2004 hearing. The legal record is recorded on CD. The hearing opened on Tuesday, December 14, 2004, at 9:01 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No. 2: Preliminary Plat with Rezone application, proof of posting, proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Amberwood II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 2 Exhibit No. 3: Preliminary Grading and Utility Plan Exhibit No. 4: Preliminary Landscaping Plan Exhibit No. 5: Neighborhood Map Exhibit No. 6: Zoning Ma Exhibit No. 7: Zoning Map with markings Exhibit No. 8: Road profile showing 4" Street and Rosario The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Susan Fiala, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The site is currently zoned Residential-1 dwelling unit per acre, the applicant is requesting a rezone to R-5 dwelling units per acre. The site is approximately 4.2 acres and it is located in the east portion of the City of Renton, off NE 4`h Street which borders the northern property line of the three parcels and one tract site. The eastern boundary is also two parcels which are within the City of Renton. To the west is Rosario Avenue NE which extends and terminates at NE 3`d Court which serves Amberwood Division I. This project is vested under the old zoning of R-5 was in effect prior to November 10, 2004 and that is what the applicant is requesting to rezone. The properties that were R-5 have been rezoned to R-4. Surrounding the site, the properties are zoned R-5 and were developed under that zoning designation. The project was submitted based on approval of the R-5 zoning and with that there is no plat available showing the current R-1. A basic estimate showed that there could be 3 — 4 lots on the 4 acre site and it would be affected by the access to those lots which would normally be deducted for density as well as what would be provided for the storm drainage tract. Staff did not look at the differences between R-4 and R-5 zoning. The categories are very similar, the R-4 does require a larger lot size of 8,000 square feet compared to the R-5 which requires 7,200 square feet. When the new zoning went into effect on November 10, there are different methods of calculating lot size as you deduct the area required for easements and any setbacks are measured from private access easements. Thi: R-4 zoning requires additional landscaping along the arterials and non -arterial roads and requires landscaping of two trees per lot. This site is designated Residential Low Density (RLD) and both the R-I and R-5 are permitted within this designation. There has been no public comment with regard to the proposed rezone. The majority of the lots in the vicinity of the subject site are equal to or smaller than the lots included with this proposed subdivision. The proposed development is subject to code requirements and SEPA imposed mitigation measures that would attempt to diminish any potential adverse impacts if the rezone is granted. The majority of the lots in the vicinity of this site are equal to or smaller than the lots proposed for this subdivision. Staff recommends approval of the rezoning of the subject site from R-1 to R-5. The applicant is proposing 17 lots, based on the approval of the rezone. The net density would be 4.9 du/acre after the deduction of public rights -of -way as well as private access easements serving three or more lots. NE 3`d Court will be extended and a new road extending south from NE 3`d Court terminating in a cul-de-sac of which a private access easement would serve Lots 11, 12, and 13. Tract A would support the storm drainage facilities. This is a three -parcel site and Tract 999 from Amber -wood Phase I that provides a portion of proposed Lot 1 of Amberwood Phase II. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated for the project, which included six mitigation measures. No appeals of the determination were filed. Amberwood 11 Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, F,(T, R January 18, 2005 Page 3 A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement is suggested for the development, which would be responsible for any common improvements and/or tracts within the plat. Traffic, Park and Fire Mitigations fees are proposed. The proposed development complies with the Residential Low Density policies for both land use and housing elements of the Comprehensive Plan. The maximum permitted density in the R-5 zone is 5.0 du/acre. Minimum density requirements do not apply. After deductions the proposed site arrives at a net density of 4.9 du/acre. The proposed plat complies with density requirements for R-5 zoning. All lots appear to comply with the standards for dimension, sizes, setbacks and building standards and would be verified at the time of individual building permit review. There are several single-family residences and outbuildings on the existing site, staff recommends that the applicant obtain demolition permits and remove all buildings located on the property prior to recording of the final plat. Each of the proposed lots satisfies the minimum lot area and dimension requirements of the R-5 zone. Lots 1, 6 and 17 would be located at the intersection of public rights -of -way and the proposed radius for each of these corner lots meet code. Primary access to the site is proposed via NE 4'h Street to Rosario Avenue NE to NE 3`d Court. NE 3`d Court would extend to the east and be stubbed for future extension. A 26-foot wide access easement would provide access to new Lots 10-13. Lots 1- 9 and 14 - 17 would gain access directly to public streets. Surrounding properties are developed under the R-5 zone, they are single-family residential on lots that are of similar size. This plat fronts NE 4"' Street which is designated as a major arterial. To insure that these lots are adequately buffered from the street, staff recommends that the applicant submit a landscape plan providing a minimum of 5-feet of irrigated landscaping maintained by the HOA and a fence design for review and approval. The Examiner inquired as to why the entire site was being cleared, why some of the natural vegetation and some of the larger trees are not being retained. Larger lots should allow saving some of the larger trees. Ms. Fiala stated that she would check the tree clearing and landscaping plan to see if there are some trees that could be saved. It appeared that most of the trees are located where the building pads would sit. The site is located within the boundaries of the Issaquah School District. The storm drainage system would be located in Tract A which has been designed to meet the Level 2 standards and water quality of the 1990 King County surface Water Design Manual. The project drains to Orting Hills Creek. Tract A should be fenced along the entire perimeter and landscaping is to be provided along; the Tract's frontage with the cul-de-sac. The development is within the water service area of Water District 90. The applicant submitted a Certificate of Water Availability. The District can provide a minimum of 1,000 gpm of available fire flow per fire hydrant. New water service stubs to each lot must be installed. The site is subject to the East Renton Interceptor Special assessment District and Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges. If the Hearing Examiner approves the rezone classification, staff recommends approval of this plat with conditions. Amberwood iI Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 4 Steve Beck, 4735 NE 41h Street, Renton stated the property was originally in King County and zoned R-6 with a conditional use family run business since 1977. The conditional use came up, the family business applied for another conditional use, the City of Renton appealed it, the Bales family agreed to file for annexation and come in under single-family zoning. When filing for annexation, they were caught up in the State Court ruling which tied them for almost a year and a half. They were held to come into the City of Renton under the R-1 zone. As many trees as possible will be retained on the proposed site. Michael Chen, Core Design, Inc., 14711 NE 291h Place, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98007 stated they concur with the staff report. Regarding Condition 4 with the irrigated landscaping would drought tolerant planting be included in place of irrigated landscaping? The Examiner stated that they might be limited by code. Susan Fiala stated that current code states that it must be irrigated landscaping. The new code effective November 10 does allow for drought resistant, staff would be willing to look at drought resistant as well. David Carton, Engineer Core Design, Inc., 14711 NE 291h Place, Suite 101, Bellevue, WA 98007 stated that he would be happy to answer any questions regarding storm drainage or utilities. Plans at this time do not show saving trees, but it is quite possible during building construction to maintain as many as possible. The largest trees on the site are on NE 4'h Street in the rear yards of Lots 4 and 5. Kayren Kittrick, Development Services stated that the only outstanding question is about the discussion going on with transportation about a swap of vacating a portion of NE 4'h in exchange for dedicating a portion of NE 4'h, a per square footage straight up swap, there are working on it now. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:45 a.m. FINDINGS CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant, Steve Beck, filed a request for a zoning reclassification of 4.24 acres of property from R- 1 (Single Family Residential - 1 dwelling unit per acre) to R-5 (Single Family Residential - 5 dwelling units per acre) together with a request for a 17-lot Preliminary Plat. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the City's responsible official issued a Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS-M). 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located 6135 NE 4th Street. The subject site is located south of NE 4th and east of Rosario Avenue NE. Amberwood 11 Preliminary Pla, File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 5 6. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of low density residential uses, but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 7. The subject site is currently zoned R-1 (Single Family - 1 dwelling unit/acre). 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption of Ordinance 5064 enacted in March 2004. 9. The subject site is approximately 4.2 acres or 184,740 square feet. The subject site is generally rectangular with a slight jog to the west at the northwest corner of the parcel. The parcel is approximately 295 feet wide (east to west) along NE 4th Street. It is approximately 611 feet deep. 10. The subject site has a slight slope downward to the south. The site drops about 15 feet over the 600 linear feet presenting a grade of approximately 3 percent. IL . The applicant has proposed removing all trees and other vegetation from the subject site. There are larger trees located on the site in the northwest corner and the southwest corner. 12. As noted above, the applicant has requested that the subject site be reclassified from R-1 to R-5 to accomrnodate a 17-lot single-family plat. 13. Access to the subject site would be south from NE 4th to a T-intersection with a new easterly extension of NE 3rd Court. Then a cul-de-sac would be created that runs south to access the majority of the site. NE 3rd Court would have a stub ending at the eastern edge of the plat to allow its eventual continuation further to the east. 14. A tier of lots would lie between NE 4th Street, a major arterial, and NE 3rd Court. Access would be taken to the south, NE 3rd Court, and no access would be permitted to NE 4th. There would then be a tier of lots on each side of the cul-de-sac roadway. Access for Lots 11, 12, and 13 would be via a private utility easement located in the southeast corner of the site. The proposed lots would range in size from 7,276 square feet to 9,254 square feet. 15. The subject site is located in the Issaquah School District. The City has adopted the Issaquah District's impact fee for new homes built within the district's boundaries. That fee is $2,937.00 per home. 16. The density for the plat would be 4.9 dwelling units per acre after subtracting roadways. 17. The development will increase traffic approximately 10 trips per unit or approximately 170 trips for the 17 single-family homes. Approximately ten percent of the trips, or approximately 17 additional peak hour trips will be generated in the morning and evening. 18. Stormwater will be contained in a Tract A, which is located in the southwest corner of the subject site. This will continue to drain to an offsite wetland. The plat will meet Level 2 standards for stormwater control. Staff has recommended that the tract be screened with fencing around its entire perimeter and landscaping adjacent to the roadway. 19. The subject site is served by City of Renton sewer utilities and a main runs along NE 4th and along the west side of the plat and can be extended to serve the site. 20. The subject site is located in Water District 90. The applicant has obtained a certificate of availability. Amberwood li Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-117, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 6 21. The subject site is basically at the eastern limits of the City. Property to the north and east is generally low -density single-family uses in both the City and County. The City zoning near the subject site is either R-1 like the subject site or is R-4, recently reclassified after the City eliminated the R-5 district and created the R-4 district. The R-4 district requires a minimum lot size of 8,000 square feet whereas the R-5 zone required a minimum lot size of 7,200 square feet. Staff noted that there are other differences in things like easement, landscaping and setbacks. 22. As noted above, the subject site is not quite rectangular. The subject site extends slightly to the west and north creating jogs in those property lines. Rosario Avenue NE will be located along the western edge of the site. The applicant and the City are discussing a swap of property along NE 4th to create a smooth boundary. The City would vacate approximately as much property along NE 4th Street as the applicant would dedicate. Staff has recommended that the applicant landscape and fence the northern property line and that a homeowners association maintain this property. 23. Staff has recommended that the applicant plant two trees in the front yard of each lot. 24. The City Council has adopted legislation that has eliminated the R-5 Zoning District. In its place the Council has created the R-4 Zoning District. In this action the zoning of R-5 parcels was changed to R- 4_ As noted, there are lot size differences and any parcel that does not meet the current, larger or changed standards would be considered a legally, non -conforming use. The change occurred on November 10, 2004. The applicant submitted the application to change the zoning from R-1 to R-5 prior to that date and, therefore, staff considered the request under the prior standards. Staff indicated that the application vested the application to the R-5 zoning. -- RECOMMENDATIONS: Rezone A property may, at the discretion of the City Council, be reclassified from one zoning district to another if it generally meets the criteria found in Section 4-9-180F(2). Those criteria include: a. The rezone is in the public interest, and b. The rezone tends to further the preservation and enjoyment of any substantial property rights of the petitioner, and c. The rezone is not materially detrimental to the public welfare or the properties of other persons located in the vicinity thereof, and d. The rezone meets the review criteria in subsections F I b and F I c of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4794, 9-20-1999) It also must meet the criteria of 4-9-180F(1): b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the polices 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. Amberwood II Preliminary Play File No.: LUA-04-117, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 7 For reasons cited below, the City Council should not approve the proposed reclassification of the subject site from R-I to R-5. 2. The City Council has substantial discretion when it comes to applying zoning categories to properties. While there are limits to that discretion such as not approving spot zones, their discretion allows them to achieve uniform standards that are in compliance with the comprehensive plan. There are a few fundamental concepts in law use law. One of them is that the law frowns on non -conforming uses. It encourages their early and reasonable termination. (Citations omitted). Therefore, the first question is why immediately create non -conforming lots? Why zone property R-5, a classification that no longer exists, plat it at that density and then immediately change the zoning to R-4 and make the plat's basis non -conforming. Staff has suggested in its reasoning and analysis of this rezone request that it is governed by vesting. In dealing with this rezone request, vesting usually follows zoning and permits an applicant who has already submitted an application to develop or use property in a manner allowed by that current zoning or the zoning regulations in place when the application was submitted. That is an applicant may develop the property with the zoning and under regulations that existed when they submitted their application. This office is not aware of any particular case where this doctrine requires that zoning that has been eliminated still be applied to a site because an application for a zoning change was submitted prior to the change. The vesting doctrine generally is not applied outside of land use regulations that change under zoning and not to the initial zoning itself. 3. Zoning is only justified if the request is appropriate. The City Council as noted has almost complete discretion in the area of zoning as long as it does not attempt to spot zone a parcel. Zoning classifications are governed by the City Council and their ability to practice it appropriately. The Council has the right to decide if zoning is appropriate given the parcel, its circumstances, its surroundings and the comprehensive plan's policies and goals. Seeing that the City Council in its judgment has determined to eliminate the R-5 zoning District and in its stead create an R-4 zoning District, it is probably inappropriate to agree that this site, at this time, should be reclassified to R-5. The comprehensive plan calls for rural residential or low residential densities on this site. The current R-I zoning fulfills that objective. While R-5, at one time was considered appropriate, clearly the City Council in eliminating the R-5 zone determined that it was not compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. The Council determined that R-4 with its larger lots and unconstrained front yard setbacks unhampered by easements was more appropriate for the area at the eastern edge of the City. It would appear that the R-5 zoning that the applicant has requested seeks additional densities that the City Council has determined are inappropriate for sites that the comprehensive plan designates for rural residential uses. This site has sheet flows that feed a wetland and then a creek. Larger lots preserve the more natural stormwater conditions found on lots in this area. There is less pavement in the form of roads when there are fewer lots and less proportional home footprints on larger lots. The subject site should not be developed at the R-5 density in light of those characteristics. 4. It is not in the public interest to change the zoning on a property that has a current and valid zoning category, in this case, R-I and change it to a category that no longer exists, in this case, R-5. It is not in the public interest to create a series of lots that immediately become non -conforming. 5. This office would like to take the tact that the City Council should consider R-4 zoning for the subject site at this juncture. R-4 zoning would probably be appropriate but since the legal notice was for R-5 zoning, it may or may not be an appropriate stance. It might be something that staff and the City Attorney can consider and reflect upon given a bit of time that allows for further analysis. Amber,,yood 11 Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 8 6. For the reasons noted above, a rezone of the subject site from R-1 to R-5 is inappropriate. A rezone of the site to R-4 would be appropriate. First, it would avoid creating immediately non -conforming lots. It would match the R-4 zoning that now attaches to nearby property and would be in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan's goals and policies of protecting sensitive lands. It would allow just a bit less intensive reuse of the subject site, lessening stornwater impacts, enlarging lots and limiting the impediment of access easements decreasing front or side yard usability. Clearly, allowing more intense use of the site than now permitted in the R-1 zone furthers the property rights of the property owner. Although, the R-1 zone does permit the use of the subject site and is frilly compatible with the Comprehensive Plan's low density housing objectives. A rezone of the subject site to R-4 would not be materially detrimental to either the public welfare or other properties in the area. Again, though, keeping the site R-1 would also not prove materially detrimental to the public welfare or other properties. 9. The Comprehensive Plan would allow either R-1, the current zoning, or R-4, a more intense but still permitted residential zoning for the subject site. The area is in the eastern or more rural portion of the City and could be served by either the R-1 or the R-4 zoning. 10_ When the subject site was recently annexed some of the intrastructure improvements were not available such as the new roads west of the subject site. R-4 zoning would increase the density potential of the subject site and take advantage of the new infrastructure. I I Therefore, it if were to be determined that the legal issues can be appropriately satisfied by the published legal notice, it might be appropriate for the City Council to approve the reclassification of the subject site from R-1 to R-4. A reclassification to R-5 is not justified at this time and should not be approved. Preliminary Plat 12. The proposed Preliminary Plat would not be appropriate given the above recommendation that the subject site be rezoned to R-4 since approximately half of the proposed lots would not meet the 8,000 square foot lot standards of the R-4 zone. A change in the plat's proposed number of lots is quite different from the zoning change proposed in this recommendation. A plat's layout, lots and roadways may be changed as an inherent part of plat review and is incorporated into any legal notice that involves a public hearing for a plat. So a division of the subject site into a similar fashion as that now proposed but that would meet the density requirements and lot area standards of the R-4 zone would be appropriate under the existing legal notice. If such a plat mirrors the current plan and has rectangular lots, lot lines at generally right angles to streets, appropriate access and stormwater containment, it would be appropriate. 13. A plat that meets the density and lot standards of the R-4 zone would serve the public use and interest. It would provide additional housing opportunities to the community. It would be in an are,, where urban services can be provided. it would avoid urban sprawl. It would increase the tax base of the City. 14. The plat would still have to provide an appropriate dedication so that NE 4th Street could be developed with a consistent and safe, non jogging alignment. 15. Similarly, the plat would have to make appropriate provisions for landscaping and screening the rear of new lots that would line NE 4th Street to protect the single family amenities of those residents. Amberwood II Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-117, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 9 16. Also, the Comprehensive Plan calls for low -density, larger lots. Part of that objective was to preserve soiree of the rural, open or wooded character of this more remote corner of the City. There are trees that already add to the character of this community and if protected, could preserve some of that character. Not every tree on lots in the R-4 zone should be removed so that the entire site is altered to urban standards. Therefore, working with staff, the applicant should preserve some of the larger trees that do not immediately lie in the way of building pads or road rights -of -way. 17. Stormwater containment is still important since the subject site feeds a wetland and ultimately a creek system. Those natural features downstream of the subject site need to retain their natural flow of water. The pond created though must be screened and fenced to provide for both public safety and to preserve the property values of homes adjacent to it. Fencing and screening as recommended by staff is appropriate_ 18. The subject site lies within the Issaquah School District and shall pay the appropriate fees as building permits are submitted. 19. In conclusion, a plat of the subject site that meets the R-4 zone's criteria would be appropriate and could be approved by the City Council if the Council decides it can rezone the subject site to R-4. RECOMMENDATIONS: The City Council should deny the request to reclassify the subject site from R-I to R-5 but should consider reclassifying the subject site from R-] to R-4 if permissible under the legal notices already - published for this application. The City Council should approve a Preliminary Plat that meets the zoning standards for the R-4 zone subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. 2. The applicant shall dedicate sufficient property to allow a consistent alignment along 4th Street adjacent to the plat. 3. In consultation with staff and a certified arborist, the applicant should preserve some of the larger trees that do not immediately lie in the way of building pads or road rights -of -way. 4. The applicant shall obtain a demolition permit and complete all inspections and approvals for all buildings located on the property prior to the recording of the final plat. The satisfaction of this requirement is subject to the review and approval of the Development Services Project Manager. 5. A sign shall be installed at the stub road, NE 3`d Ct., that informs residents of the plat that the road would be extended to the east in the future and carry through -traffic. The sign shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. 6. A homeowner's association or maintenance agreement shall be created concurrently with the recording of the final plat in order to establish maintenance responsibilities for all shared improvements, including fences, landscaping, utilities, private easements, etc. A draft of the document(s), if necessary, shall be submitted to the City of Renton Development Services Division Amberwood 11 Preliminary Plat File No.: LUA-04-117, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 10 for review and approval by the City Attorney and Property Services section prior to recording of the final plat. 7. The applicant shall install a modulated, decorative fence, with irrigated landscaping along the entire plat's frontage with NE 41h Street. All fencing shall be located and designed to not into; fere with sight distances required at the intersections of public streets. The applicant shall submit a landscape plan and fence design to the City's Development Services Division for review and approval prior to installation. The fence and landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. 8. The applicant shall install a fence of a quality material (no chain -link, if possible) with a landscaped visual barrier that includes plant materials which would provide a year-round dense screen within three (3) years from the time of planting along the entire perimeter of Tract A (storm drainage facility). The applicant shall submit a landscape plan and fence design to the City's Development Services Division for review and approval prior to installation. All fences and landscaping shall be installed prior to recording of the final plat. 9. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Issaquah School District Mitigation Fee of $2,937.00 per new single-family lot. The fee shall be paid prior to building permit approval. ORDERED THIS 18'h day of January 2005. FRED J. KALMAN HEARING E M1NER TRANSMITTED THIS 18'4 day of January 2005 to the parties of record: Susan Fiala 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Michael Chen Core Design, Inc. 14711 NE 291h,Place, Ste. Bellevue, WA 98007 Steve Beck 4735 NE 4'h Street Renton, WA 98056 David Cayton Core Design, Inc. 101 14711 NE 29'h Place, Ste. 101 Bellevue, WA 98007 TRANSMITTED THIS 18" day of January 2005 to the following: Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison Larry Warren, City Attorney Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator Alex Pietsch, Economic Development Jennifer Henning, Development Services Stacy Tucker, Development Services Kayren Kittrick 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Stan Engler, Fire Larry Meckling, Building Official Planning Commission Transportation Division Utilities Division Neil Watts, Development Services Janet Conklin, Development Services King County Journal Amberwood 11 Preliminary Pla, File No.: LUA-04-1 17, PP, ECF, R January 18, 2005 Page 11 Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section IOOGofthe City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., February 1, 2005. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m., February 1, 2005. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision -maker concerning the proposal. Decision -makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to -openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. „raf av , Sl.Y3W:�itOddW/133d1S'd74HLSHlf IN rL ,1 M Mf 1 J,d YAargsINID YrIM111FIM IYMfW a vw (f,MlrD rfN .v LA,1,0 M.M'.// 1NIIYYIMA.r YAYlC1P, /rA.yf LXON INW,f � rww 1u. aw �,�� \-ww wutu awno � f Ao+ nv a nw auu l nrx av N0I1035OVOd31/S`NO 7VOIdAi -.vw • ,rry ,raurar rr1w. auwnw, Y)tlf.W IMN1J9 IN]N! N,Mr . .t Nr 'S1N3wnNow 3DN3:13x1W 9VNI21P39 zr SISVQ 04 l :31doS tl� nrrr Anw,r mw+ P� r.ur Aru w� 'ra a rvno..o.. r ��fa� urr.uxt .. elwrw. ur N�10 UYf:� •..��.0 J10i'.r C�1 a v-4 en, 77TTTTT�- P4 Milli'll! z eq 9 FR- 4 alliz 145th Pl. -4- L SE 138th Pl. SE 139th Pl. SE 140th Pl. SE I 'I I ( SE Q 143rd PI SE 132nd St. Lo SE 136th St. 137th Pi. P4 C/l Q5 142nd St. I SE 138th ------------- SE 139th ISE 143rd [14:4 t h j t. -- —\VSE444-t-h-] z ZONING ---- Renton day umflo F7 P/B/PW TECEUMAL 5MVXW UJ04/03 Ho 14 T23*N R5E W 1/2 5314 Ww r Mutl f•pTM emw�.atli'Nilw •m» lvTII,.ttp ww >rtwwlw14 NOR. I I AA�(L •r D4nra NE1/4, NWIVA SEC 14, LT P ?J N., RCE• 5 E, w..M. • .ii ri^Ri::� ^ N.G DTI ST. (&C 1281H It` a A •il.) tiw PY.OYwI �'YM1M •pNtl eo ..a. .aT.vrwa-IT � l7xi. `1 \ L1555AL DESCRIPTION / ` P.wGn . N, LOT+ M KND rdiMr $IOW MITM"M 10 ,AO4MM TO NIdR MAT POW402D NO•vvtn 4, RL VotR Rtomoft wr•MR 1..040.b., )�oO+m. O R1tl OOMT. YII.N.YTOK IN tln.H r. c .. Nn.i. _..^ PI+CtL • LOT i 4 w)IlO WQ NrOwT PLAT NJ "IORow, ACCOIm)w To ! D 1f M w MIT mcems" 7IpY .4, wL RI Vo[- Omm NPYR L Nl4~4 P[COm. OP RNO ODa`RY, WAMN04WTOL PIRO{L C 16 M NOwrN NIy V TN{ NONM T M7 % d n NoiwMlt)T .uwnlw a b[Cld N, TDINM{P 7) t.p.Nt wMlOt) tNr,.IT� N N)n TAMT, W W T.iOltN+n +watrweww {xC[PT i,w I- ".a.a .q I YT MwO, M MIJ111itO Ya►w r+l{ +? N IN MlitPr YID xctn M NCwl,l M w!R T.IowtO OOM/7p TO We CDWTY o w Ow woof w1wW.l. K DttD I�CO.OtO tND[w MCO.OW Awl IT AND ox .LNMr AND C[PT PwtT 00410 14OItR Mo LwNT OOTAIIr i1WR.P•WY bt uL i PAMIL a RIT 0 M"xT.[000• ACC~ 4 TO TNt PLAT TWWW CP K IUD, tCOX". % W4TO0"l PU•t. PMKr W T1MOtNN Vr •ItCOICO Y 14 7 16, mWo �►j, ! IIIIIII�� __ ®AC4 .s1� N SCALE: 1" - 40' A;t MMMViWn DASIS OF 6EAKNGS 1 I \ ) ti r 1 \1 1 111 y',i�.rt. '� II• � :. 1 tn' I . I I NM4fTW Pfl'1-M We Pk-4~NM. WN Mb W7•Pglo M PLAOt ANC xW VY0 DRW Ptw CO',' O RMPI NOw2ORIL e aRitaL It1{Ipltl PyLIWD nD trout • ItM t .r. s. a•sY._::.�. 1 � f�Kt p14Y1 W '`tb!-gin•--.-.-T_.:' � Inw.w) •nnVxp! � Ex-ITNO •Twrc,ul�. t RO`1PAD !MJ e \ 1.... ' W.U.. ! 1 • mNr.:��. I .�•t171.,M 1 ENCI-IMARK97 PTW[•V ft NYIICK D-C. N TNt M, N[ IM 41. ryy q.M O(I. WM AM OL tL-"rM 09(OF.N x416M1 -ft"� W .IIYt Mt�p p.G N nit M 1a. Il/M (T. I "WA66 NAM O. (*UG Dill DATUls mw w.t OA%m P[w c-r d mw*H V)hTIY APPLICANT .nw4.ax POPRmPt RM[[T RO"UO.. OILNER LNlT[D PMDItRMNP �.Ln wx .Dw Pwroll W.M.wioN..a. f17)7 4T. O N GORILY, I.wN VIL91 PLAWr=R/EWx NEER/9URV EYCR wt p[NeN NC L l.nl PL• . +OO .N , lw..II.rMYT ON ..001 14T)) CT, LT -ACT, LMV w [N . PLI.IZw olYb F I "-O.e.wN PNw Pt,• .nt PLC -M).TsroR #j" SITE STATISTICS .NMAO[.. N.cwrf . ld PrAI.. is Nos • N, is ..u••P+ +• .o.,. raa Nn wa• •w.14o. .I. .+.o••e.[e wt• vrx .- .Nat IMn!LT No. a LorF n AVIK"t LOT Nx• I- P. PROPOMD DOI.ITY, IA OWAG 1wh gp OVWlYT, PI.OPOItD 2oNNer w.t PUtLb R.O•V io)Nl. )I TLCT'A'•.TQl Otn-N -.1,.1, DENSITY CALCULATIONS OwOM -A 0 HIOPtIRY• b0•V IN,,l.O, � iOH., Y F-A • Pwnan ICOt.. TwICT) • .tTLMo. w^ W Nit Al" -4Mi. M Ow 1 r ";P!• N0. P LOTF n R LOT. WAD WO&I N I' IT DtN.n•' O .IO OLI.L- Wr: i T[M1 ICA• Iw-rm DM'1I6[D TWO. YTIM1 PLMRNO �\ PLIGt N vtwT. PwRIOW oolaL[ LVDtM1O WLL et RtJ[eGDTs�o! .T.4 al •u q{D[D eA"' P[w NOT{F ILL eon TO et ILWbL{ ![I{P --6 T.OI.T .s0 -n-D Al ILL TMt. \\ NOLD CI.PIN Q M1 .,ILL IT OR XG1 ANOY[ INI"O 6-P. F-MCT ll{..L Mlp L- A' Iw.,1'1 NAAI' e.rxP�u *o et .[rn[o wND tlunw w.LY . ND N{wMnc.L cp+Plcnw �( wplT•. KL V"Y. TI{.. OONTINMy, wtelIpLt{. P,Lnw11L. i('\'+�� !1, 7.:I. .TINt., RLIn M• O+A x b' N7+ 40 OILY. PI ``I i {LMTN; CNIN•LOOL TTPt OR wnew I 6VT. TRD M I+O' Vm tbNfr I.RgN Intw GM OPO.0+6 �1 ItI.eN �. AO"TIV. IW4•4ADu.NOWPRMT MmT . wTILLITON I.O'+OY[ AT CQRtTbN A PLMRNe n11P PIMRNer PwOVb[ .' MO OM{.• T+wlt RW , f• O{[P MVLCN N W[LL I.LO,r V7• • P 1Kt .IOLD VAGK IROM tRIH. 1• TO b• ww..,te oRlo[ PwtPIRt PLMR)b D[D P{R .P[C'F IT N.L LOO.IN Mo J� nix .m TO 1.• oM1 ox- 0 woprwAlA MO 4'm* VIIL Du -Y t I.YT w.0.rti.oDxi.L. M•T- wOOr. MO wn.v & / .tT DILL w VOI.TVw.tp Wt OR GO'rMGrm MOVo �� UVD[- GILL PMiT-/T,ON TO MMIIi ! J O' TREE PLANTING AND STAKING PLANT UST $-lot �{O[MIFlDNAMt COMMONNAMY sprel MVA)It7ill m ®-RIV1V• --I NIPL[ •IwMTM1GW.-A--IA-'. 10•.))'GKu•tlF erD bOWIIIL', r(IMI . MO YGIRLn MNTML• CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL SUBMITTING DATA: Dept/Div/Board... City Clerk Staff Contact...... Bonnie Walton SUBJECT: Bid opening on February 8, 2005, for CAG-05-001, Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase II Project EXHIBITS: IBITS: Staff Recommendation Bid Tabulation Sheet (14 bids) AI #: z f FOR AGENDA OF: February 14, 2005 AGENDA STATUS: Consent......... X Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance....... Resolution...... Old Business.... New Business.... Study Session... Other........... RECOMMENDED ACTION: APPROVALS: Legal Dept...... Council concur Finance Dept.... Other........... FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required... $1,915,867.90 Transfer/Amendment.. Amount Budgeted........ $2,700,000.00 Revenue Generated... Total Project Budget ... City Share Total Project... SUMMARY OF ACTION: Engineer's Estimate: $2,323,479.49 RECOMMENDED ACTION: In accordance with Council procedure, bids submitted at the subject bid opening met the following three criteria: There was more than one bid, the low bid was within the project budget, and there were no irregularities. Therefore, staff recommends acceptance of the low bid submitted by RCI Construction Group in the amount of $1,915,867.90. CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 9, 2005 TO: Bonnie Walton, City Clerk FROM: John Hobson, Wastewater Engineer (ext. 7279) SUBJECT: Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase II Bid Award The Planning/Building/Public Works Department has reviewed the bids submitted for the Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase II project and recommends that the bid be awarded to RCI. We are requesting that an agenda bill for "Council Concur" be prepared for the February 14, 2005, Council Meeting. The bid opening was on Tuesday, February 8, 2005. There were 14 bids received. There were minor irregularities in six of the bids. However, none of the irregularities changed the positions of any of the bidders. The low bidder is RCI, with a bid of $1,915,867.90. The engineer's estimate was $2,323,479.49. The project budget amount is $2,700,000. The low bid is within the existing budget. The project will install approximately 7,285 linear feet of new 18" sanitary sewer main to replace an existing 12" sewer main and also replace approximately 1,149 linear feet of existing side sewers within the right-of-way. HA\File Sys\WWP - WasteWater\WWP-27-3150 Sunset Interceptor Ph II\Award-Clerk-Sunset2.doc CITY OF RENTON Page 1 of 2 BID TABULATION SHEET 'ROJECT: Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase II; CAG-05-001 DATE: February 8, 2005 FORMS BID BIDDER Bid Combined Proposal/ Includes 8.8% Sales Tax Bond Addendum Triple Form Buno Construction LLC X X X $2,205,256.32 20219 99th Ave SE Snohomish, WA 98296 Dan E. Buno Frank Coluccio Construction Company X X X $4,010,984.90 9600 Martin Luther King Jr. Way S. Seattle, WA 98118 Joseph J. Coluccio R.L. Alia Company X X X $2,067,422.55 107 Williams Ave. S. Renton, WA 98055 Richard L. Alia Shoreline Construction Co. X X X $2,454,300.61 PO Box 358 Voodinville, WA 98072-0358 Jouglas J. Suzuki Thomco Const., Inc. X X X $2,368,292.53 13700 44th St. NE Lake Stevens, WA 98258 David Thomas Tri-State Construction, Inc. X X X $2,408,682.51 PO Box 3686 Bellevue, WA 98009 Joe Agostino VLS Construction, Inc. X X X $3,042,191.62 PO Box 630 Ravensdale, WA 98051 Sharon Gillis Westwater Construction Company X X X $2,483,390.46 31833 Kent Black Diamond Rd. Auburn, WA 98092 Thomas J. Caplis LEGEND: Forms: Triple Form: Non -Collusion Affidavit, Anti -Trust Claims, Minimum Wage PROJECT: Sunset Sewer Interceptor Phase II; CAG-05-001 Page 2 of 2 DATE: February 8, 2005 FORMS BID BIDDER Bid Combined Proposal/ Includes 8.8% Sales Tax Bond Addendum Triple Form James W. Fowler Company X X X $2,714,026.88 PO Box 489 Dallas, OR 97338 John Fowler D.D.J. Const. Co., Inc. PO Box 130 Ravensdale, WA 98051 David Dumford Rodarte Construction, Inc. PO Box 1875 Auburn, WA 98071-1875 J.R. Rodarte King Construction 982 Thornton Pl. SW Pacific, WA 98047-2115 Brad Holt RCI Construction Group 'O Box 1730 Sumner, WA 98390 Andrew C. Albrecht MidMountain Contractors, Inc. PO Box 2909 Kirkland, WA 98083-2909 J.L. Leuere X X X X X X X X X X X X X I X I X ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE TOTAL: LEGEND: Forms: Triple Form: Non -Collusion Affidavit, Anti -Trust Claims, Minimum Wage $2,243,068.67 $2,481,077.10 $2,064,471.30 $1,915,867.90 $2,302,373.38 $2,323,479.49 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL, AGENDA BILL (; ,. Al#: Submitting Data: Dept/ D1v/Board.. Community Services/Facilities Staff Contact...... Peter Renner x6605 Subject: Final Pay Estimate 200 Mill Building Chiller Replacement MacDonald -Miller Facility Solutions, Inc. File No. CAG-04-113 Exhibits: Final Pay Estimate ( No. 2) Notice of Completion of Public Works Contract Recommended Action: Council concur For Agenda of. February 14, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... Information ......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept....., Other ............... Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required... $ 69,604.13 Transfer/Amendment...... Amount Budgeted....... $180,000.00 Revenue Generated........ Total Project Budget $121,594.88 City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Community Services Department submits CAG-04-113, 200 Mill Building Chiller Replacement, for final pay estimate and release of retainage. The project started on October 28, 2004, and was completed on December 30, 2004. The contractor, MacDonald -Miller Facility Solutions, Inc., fulfilled the terms of their contract by replacing the main chiller at the 200 Mill Building (former City Hall) with a new chiller. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the project, authorization for final pay estimate in the amount of $69,604.13, commencement of the 60-day lien period, and release of the retained amount of $5,588.00 to MacDonald -Miller Facility Solutions, Inc., Contractor, once all required releases are obtained. X Rentonnet/agnbill/ hh DATE: January 7, 2005 TO: Tracy Schuld, Finance Department FROM: Peter Renner, Facilities Director CONTRACTOR: MacDonald -Miller PROJECT NAME: 200 Mill Building Chiller Replacement CONTRACT NO.: CAG-04-113 ESTIMATE NO. 2 1. CONTRACTOR EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $67,056.00 2. SALES TAX @ 8.6% $5,900.93 3. TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS ESTIMATE $72,956.93 4. EARNINGS PREVIOUSLY PAID CONTRACTOR 5. * EARNINGS DUE CONTRACTOR THIS ESTIMATE 6. SUBTOTAL - CONTRACTOR PAYMENT 7. RETAINAGE ON PREVIOUS EARNINGS 8. ** RETAINAGE ON EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE 9. SUBTOTAL - RETAINAGE 10. SALES TAX PREVIOUSLY PAID 11. SALES TAX DUE THIS ESTIMATE 12. SUBTOTAL * (95% x Line 1) ** (RETAINAGE @ 5%) GRAND TOTAL FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTION $42,468.80 $63,703.20 $2,235.20 $3,352.80 $3,933.95 $5,900.93 $106,172.00 $5,588.00 $121,594.88 PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR (LINES 5 AND 11) No. 2 $69,604.13 Account 306.000003.005.5940.0019.62.000011 RETAINED AMOUNT (LINE 8) No. 2 $3,352.80 Account 306.000003.005.5940.0019.62.000011 TOTAL THIS ESTIMATE: $72,956.93 CHARTER 116, LAWS OF 1965 I, THE UNDERSIGNED DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED, THE SERVICES RENDERED OR THE LABOR PERFORMED AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND THAT THE CLAIM IS A JUST, DUE AND UNPAID OBLIGATION AGAINST THE CITY OF RENTON, AND THAT 1 AM AUTHORIZED TO AUTHENTICATE AND CERTIFY TO SAID CLAIM. SIGNED: DATE: TO: Tracy Schuld, Finance Dept FROM: Peter Renner, Facilities Director CONTRACTOR: MacDonald -Miller PROJECT NAME: 200 Mill Building Chiller Replacement CONTRACT NO.: CAG-04-113 ESTIMATE NO. 1 1. CONTRACTOR EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $44,704.00 2. SALES TAX @ 8.6% $3,933.95 3. TOTAL CONTRACT AMOUNT THIS ESTIMATE $48,637.95 4. EARNINGS PREVIOUSLY PAID CONTRACTOR $0.00 5. * EARNINGS DUE CONTRACTOR THIS ESTIMATE $42,468.80 6. SUBTOTAL - CONTRACTOR PAYMENT $42,468.80 7. RETAINAGE ON PREVIOUS EARNINGS $0.00 8. ** RETAINAGE ON EARNINGS THIS ESTIMATE $2,235.20 9. SUBTOTAL - RETAINAGE $2,235.20 10. SALES TAX PREVIOUSLY PAID $0.00 11. SALES TAX DUE THIS ESTIMATE $3,933.95 ' 2. SUBTOTAL $3,933.95 * (95% x Line 1) ** (RETAINAGE @ 5%) GRAND TOTAL $48,637.95 FINANCE DEPARTMENT ACTION PAYMENT TO CONTRACTOR (LINES 5 AND 11) No. 1 $46,402.75 Account 306.000003.005.5940.0019.62.000011 RETAINED AMOUNT (LINE 8) No. 1 $2,235.20 Account 306.000003.005.5940.0019.62.000011 TOTAL THIS ESTIMATE: $48,637.95 CHARTER 116, LAWS OF 1965 I, THE UNDERSIGNED DO HEREBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT THE MATERIALS HAVE BEEN FURNISHED, THE SERVICES RENDERED OR THE LABOR PERFORMED AS DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND THAT THE CLAIM IS A JUST, DUE AND UNPAID OBLIGATION AGAINST THE CITY OF RENTON, AND THAT I AM AUTHORIZED TO AUTHENTICATE AND CERTIFY TO SAID CLAIM. SIGNED: of Washington Department of Revenue nState Audit Procedures & Administration PO Box 47474 Olympia, Washington 98504-7474 Reg.No.: NOTICE OF COMPLETION OF PUBLIC WORKS CONTRACT From: DEPARTMENT USE ONLY City of Renton Assigned To 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055-2132 Date Assigned Notice is hereby given relative to the completion of contract or project described below. Description of Contract Replacement of the main chiller for the 200 Mill Building. Contractor's Name MacDonald Miller Phone No. 206-767-7995 Contractor's Address 7717 Detroit Ave SW, Seattle, WA 98146 Date Work Commenced October 28, 2004 Date Work Completed December 30, 2004 Date Work Accepted January 7, 2005 Surety or Bonding Co. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Agent's Address 175 Berkeley St., Boston, MA 02117 Contract Amount: Additions or Reductions: Sales Tax: Total $ 111,760.00 $ 0.00 $ 9,834.88 $ 121,594.88 Phone No: Amount Disbursed: $ 116,006.88 Amount Retained: $ 5,588.00 Total: $ 121,594.88 (Disbursing Officer) The Disbursing Officer must complete and mail THREE copies of this notice to the Department of Revenue, Olympia, Washington 98504- 7474, immediately after acceptance of the work done under this contract. NO PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE FROM RETAINED FUND until receipt of Department's certificate, and then only in accordance with said certificate. FORM REV 31 0020 (12-92) Notice of Completion-200 Mill Chller.doc CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works Dept/Div/Board.. Technical Services Staff Contact...... Karen McFarland (ext.7209) Subject: Easement Request from Sound Transit for the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) Across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004 Exhibits: Issue Paper September 5, 2002 Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation Quit Claim Deed with Exhibits Proposed Easement with Exhibits Recommended Action: Council Concur For Agenda of: February 14, 2005 Agenda Status Consent .............. Public I fearing.. Correspondence.. Ordinance ............. Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Study Sessions...... 1nfOnnation......... Approvals: Legal Dept......... Finance Dept...... Other ............... fiscal Impact: N/A Expenditure Required... Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... 'Dotal Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: X 0 Technical Services staff was contacted by the Pharos Corporation on behall'of Sound 'Transit to modify the area that Sound Transit took from the City of Renton in a September 2002 condemnation action. Staff noticed an error in the Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation of September 5, 2002, in that Sound "Transit obtained fee simple title to the area rather than an easement. To correct this error, Sound "Transit agreed to convey fee simple title back to the City in exchange for an easement granted to Sound Transit for the modified area. Sound Transit has conveyed fee simple title back to the City. Staff is now requesting that Council accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve its easement request so that an easement can be granted to Sound Transit for the modified area across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve the easement request and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the easement by which the City of Renton will formally grant an easement across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004 to the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. li:AFite Sq_s l ND - Land Subdivision & Survcying KccordsU.ND-95 - Fasemcnts\00-! t 1005\ab 0205.docAhh1tp CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 4, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: ,Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler �N � FROM: Gregg Zimmermar(Aaministrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department STAFF CONTACT: Karen McFarland, Technical Services Engineer (ext. 7209) SUBJECT: Sound Transit/ Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company (BNSF) Easement Request Across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004 ISSUE: Technical Services staff was contacted by the Pharos Corporation on behalf of Sound Transit to modify the area that Sound Transit obtained from the City of Renton in a September 2002 condemnation action. In working with Sound Transit's agent to correct this error, staff noticed an error in the Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation of September 5, 2002, in which Sound Transit obtained fee simple title to the area rather than an easement. To correct this error, Sound Transit agreed to convey fee simple title back to the City and that the City should grant an easement to Sound Transit for the modified area. Sound Transit has conveyed fee simple title back to the City. Staff is now requesting that Council accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve its easement request so an easement can be granted to Sound Transit for the modified area across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004. RECOMMENDATION: Accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve its easement request and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the easement document by which the City of Renton will formally grant an easement across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: In August 2001, Technical Services staff was contacted by Pharos Corporation staff that sought on behalf of their client, Sound Transit, to purchase an easement across a portion of City -owned property under the responsibility of the Surface Water Utility. Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Sound Transit Easement February 4, 2005 Page 2 Railway Company (BNSF) required this property so that it could make and maintain railroad improvements associated with a Sound Transit Commuter Rail project. Specifically, BNSF needed the area in order to run a fiber optic transmission line through the easement area and to build a retaining wall, an access road, and a switch house within the easement area. This area consisted of approximately 16,225 square feet and is shown in Exhibit A. Based on an appraisal by a qualified appraiser of the property's Fair Market Value, Sound Transit offered the City $30,000.00 in exchange for this easement. The City and Sound Transit were not able to successfully complete this exchange through negotiation and Sound Transit instituted a condemnation action against the City of Renton under King County Cause No. 02-2-21757-5 KNT. In a September 5, 2002, Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation, Sound Transit acquired fee simple title to this 16,225 square foot area from the City of Renton for its Sound Transit Commuter Rail project. In April of 2004, Technical Services staff was contacted by the Pharos Corporation on behalf of their client, Sound Transit, to modify the area that Sound Transit obtained from the City of Renton in the September 2002 condemnation action. A portion of the area was acquired in error. Correspondingly, there was another smaller area that Sound Transit intended to acquire but did not. Thus, Sound Transit meant to "take" the area shown in Exhibit B, but actually condemned the area shown in Exhibit A. In working with Sound Transit's agent to correct this error, staff had occasion to review the Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation of September 5, 2002, and noticed that Sound Transit obtained fee simple title rather than the easement that had been the basis of the failed negotiations. The Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act, known as the Uniform Act, requires that "just compensation" (i.e. fair and equitable compensation) be paid for the property rights acquired on all federally funded transportation projects. In the case of this acquisition, "just compensation" for the easement was determined to be $30,000. For a total acquisition (i.e. a fee simple acquisition), it was determined, from the same approved appraisal, that $113,575 was "just compensation". Staff notified Sound Transit of the error that was made in the condemnation action and requested Sound Transit to review its file. Staff recommended a solution to fix this error if Sound Transit concurred with staff s conclusion. After reviewing its file, Sound Transit agreed that an error had been made in the condemnation action and accepted our recommendation to convey fee simple title back to the City and for the City to grant an easement to Sound Transit for the modified area. As shown in the Quit Claim Deed Exhibit, Sound Transit has fulfilled its part of the agreement. Thus, staff is now requesting that Council accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve its current easement request and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the easement. CONCLUSION: Technical Services staff was contacted by the Pharos Corporation on behalf of Sound Transit to modify the area that Sound Transit obtained from the City of Renton in a September 2002 HAFile Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-95 - Easements\0041\2005\IP_0205.doc\KMtp Sound Transit Easement February 4, 2005 Page 3 condemnation action. In working with Sound Transit's agent to correct this error, staff noticed an error in the Stipulated Consent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation of September 5, 2002, in which Sound Transit obtained fee simple title to the area rather than an easement. To correct this error, Sound Transit agreed to convey fee simple title back to the City and that the City should grant an easement to Sound Transit for the modified area. Thus, staff is now requesting that Council accept Sound Transit's quit claim deed and approve its easement request and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the easement document by which the City of Renton will formally grant an easement across Tax Parcel Number 252304-9004. Attachments cc: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director Dave Christensen, Wastewater and Technical Services Supervisor H:\File Sys\LND - Land Subdivision & Surveying Records\LND-95 - Easements\0041\2005\IP 0205.doc\KMtp SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E, W.M. I I KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON I ' ' 1 I NORTH LINE HENRY A. MEADER DLC J46 t 01 iy I 3 I (n N Io I� I 10 N J 0 I NOR 7H LINE BOEINC S f j I LOIJCACR£S PARCEL 'C' I W 1 p 4 I ASPHALT ROADWAY I O 1/16 SECTION LINE 1 SO4.09'J2E.--------------_ 36. 45' 1 4.9 8'OS f 74.9B' I SW 27TH Sr I 547106105"W I u 52.6J' I 1POB n'1Vn� E30�r.'RvL4 ^� I a SB753'55 E pr b P C5 4Q 00' R � ' S02776105'w 25.79' I ONE IN H ' 110' SB75B?5 E AT FULL SCALE. IF NOT ONE INCH 1751' I 0' SCALE ACCORDINCLY 0 I I NB758'25'W 180B.18' I I SO2176'O5'W 28.41' I PRO`' C.IT�•: ^5 vbi I N875J'55'W I 77.51' � I N8758?5'w 1624.00' 1 I I — — — I —NW 1/4 NE 1/4 25 1 I SW 1/4 ------------ SE 1/4 3 o. I ILEGENO 3 N I {*�n+= k • PROPOSED EASEMENT o �°+ • I PROPERTY LINE A I y PUBLIC R/W — - - — BNSF R/W NBTSB 15'W I 25 SEC770AI CENTER -24-0, 45' p COVERNMENT LOT RENSED CRB 01/17/02 ��. �1•+�,/— T' PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PACE 2 OF 3 DRAM BY: CRB DATE: 12/06/01 y (� r `' CHECKED: DM DATE: 12/06/01 i11 SOUNDTRANSR C � ` DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. — Surveyors PARCEL AREA: 763,648 TAKE AREA: 16,225 16928 WOONWAl3E-RMUM Ran, 0-107 (425) 45J-sus ' ' ASSESSOR NO.: 2523049004 DATE: 12 06 01 woom"LE, wA37rKM 96072 FAX (425) 493-4650 0 % OHNER: CIIX OF RENTON COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM MP 11.4K SITE NO.: 15 PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A I -4 I I MOB h I I I 1 I I I n0'L I 1 I I I _ I I r SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E, W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON I I I NORTH LINE HENRY A. WEADER DLC 146 MR OIN N I/ I � I 0 1) t 3 I NORTH LINE BOEING S 10 I LONCACRES "G" J PARCEL I Y o I ASPHALT ROADWAY I 1/16 SECTION LINE -- SD40932£—I ---- ------ I OS E I SW 27TH ST 74.9B ' 74.98 I ' 6 S47T16'05'W i J 57. 6J' C, "v aI PnR��.. k o� e h I I ONE INCH I' D AT FULL SCALE. IF NOT ONE INCH I SCALE ACCORDINGLY I. N,9 5B 25 "W 1808.18' S02'06'05'W 55 00' 01'21£ 53.90' 53.9 oC S50 t7121 "W " 80.84' N875B 25'W 1624.00' - --- I NW 1/4 NE 1/4 __. 25— — — — SW1/4 — — — — — — — — — — — - S E 1/4 3_ I L ND c I PROPOSED EASEMENT 0 y ( PROPERTY LINE — ' — — PUBLIC R/W ' — - BNSf R/W ( 25 SECTION. CENTER 75B25'W 249.45' I' p GOVERNMENT LOT RENSED GRB 05/22/02 S FSovnDTkANsrr q �`++ + -ts • �^ +*'+ Lee PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PACE 2 OF 3 DRAriN BY: GR8 DATE: 12/06/01 CHECKED: OTH DATE: 12/06/01 DUANE HARTMAN k ASSOCIATES, INC. — Surveyors — 16928 WOOWMIIE-REDWID RW. 1-107 (425) /E3-5355 WOODONLE, WA-%fWTON W72 (AX' (425) 483-/E50 PARCEL AREA: 7 j 48 TAKE AREA: 15.580 SQ FT ASSESSOR NO.: 2523049004 DATE: 12/06/01 01NJER: CITY Of RENTON SITE NO.: �`PARCEL NO.: 520I.47.k _ COMIJUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM UP IIAX =� �� `� � `� �� ....� �� -�� ~� � � ?- ,� �:� C` . � � �� .., J � �� -� �, -� �._. J `�-� � � � v ..��v 0 C" C'I 0 0 N AFTER RECORDING MAIL TO: Name Sound Transit Jennifer Belk Address 401 S Jackson St City/State Seattle, WA 98104-2826 Document Title(s): (or transactions contained therein) Stipulated Consent Judgment And Decree Of Appropriation Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Grantor(s): (Last name first, then first name and initials) City of Renton Grantee(s): (Last name first, then first name and initials) Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority Abbreviated Legal Description as follows: (i a lot/block/plat or section/township/range/quarter/ quarter) Parcel 1 C, W %, Section 25, Township 23 N. Range 4 E. W M , City of Renton, King County, WA Assessor's Property Tax Parcel/Account Number(s): 252304-9004-07 NOTE: The auditor/recorder will rely on the information on the form The rtaff will not read the document to verb the accuracy or completeness of the indexing information provided herein SEP-85-2002 13 14 Warren Barber & Fontes P 03/12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon the consent of the parties upon the Petition of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority ("Petitioner"), seeking 1) A determination of just compensation to be paid m money for the talang and appropriation of the subject property, 2) A )udgment and decree of the Court providing for payment of the Just compensation so determined; and 3) A decree of appropriation vesting title to the subject property in Petitioner and adjudging that Petitioner be entitled to immediate possession thereof THE COURT HAVING previously entered its adjudication of public use and necessity declaring that the use for which the subject property, .legally described in Exbibit A to this pleading, and as described in the Petition, (the "Property"), is sought to be appropriated is a public use, and declaring that there is a public necessity for such appropnation, and Petitioner having been represented by Larry J Smith and Jeffrey A Beaver of GTaharn & Dimn, its attorneys, and the 1311 City of Renton having been represented by Lawrence J Warren of Warren Barber & Fo,ates, P_S , 14 cv 15 0 16 17 rn G 18 cam► 0 19 N 201 21 22 23 24 its attorneys, and the parties having stipulatod to and approved the form of. this Cotsent Judgment and Decree of Appropriation, and the Court being informed that the patties have also entered into a settlement agreement that serves as part of the consideration and basis of this agreed order, which Agreement is attached as Eiibibit R, Hereby NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with the parties' stipulation and agreement, it is ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the -sum of Thirty Thousand and Nol100 Dollars (S30,000 00) represents the, Just compcn ZUon for the Property taken IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUGED AND DECREED that upon deposit of this sum into the registry of the court Pebligner shall be Wanted the nght, with regard to the property described in Exhibit A to this Decree, to appropriate, use and take the Property and all of the right, title and interest in or to the Property free and clear of all claims by all Respondents to this action, and title shall thereupon be vested xn Peduoner in fee simple STIPULATED CONSENT JUDGMENT AND DECREE OF APPROPRIATION -- 2 M26905 )7"3) doc GRAHAM & DUNN c 1420 FAfth Arcouc 33-4 Ftoor Sc*W*WashuVoo 98101-2390 (206) Q44300/ sit (206) 340-95" QCT GC -MAT "EXHIBIT A" BMSF/V COKMuTEs RAL. 6EATTLE To TACOMA PARCEL TA 14 CIMM" CITY OF RiN70K A UL"C.rAL COM'Z)RATKON WE ts, rrjo.-CT No 020WA ooVat X?WEAL7Tt LAND Jrn.E MILRANCE CCWANY orom No voam4, NOYEMMA 7. 2M LLC,At DESMPTION• THAT PORTION OF A 1KACT OF LANO CONVEYED BY BURLINCTON NORIMERN RAILROAD PROPERTIES. INC, A DELAWARE OWDRATION• TO THE CITY OF REH70n, A MUNICIPAL COAPORkTION UNDE3S A OVIT CLAW DEED RECORDED VNDER KINC CCUVTY NO 920514144 RECORDS OF KWC COUNTY WASIIINC704. SAID TRACT BEING PARCEL TO. E)(H)817 'k" OF SAT7 WT CL 41M DEED, DESCF1391D AS FOLLCWS- CO/ANENCING AT THE 1405T NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID P1►�'LL •C ON THE EAST MARGIN OF TILE DURUNCION NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COUPANY )DO FOOT RIGH7- CF-WAY. RSOUTH OWEST LINE OF SAIDPkRCU AND EAST NACN OF SAIDWGRISOI-WAy. no 32 FEET THE j6 'NT OF PiGj.-mm. THENCE NORTH 47VO 05' EAST, WITHIN SAID PARCEL '4 VOftET TO THE EAST LINE THEREOF, THENCE SOVTN 04V9 32_ EAST. AkMG THE EAST UNE T1C,ECF. 30 Le rrET, THENCE SOUTH 4-,W'O5' NEST 5263 W. THENCE salTli 02'06.05' VC5T. 516 41 MT, THENCE SOUTH 8733'15' EAST 4000 FEET 10 T11C EAST I h.E OF --'AC POST NORTHERLT PORTION Or PARCEL IC, THENCE SOUTH 02`DS'C5' WEST, A'_ONG SNO EAST LRIE. 25 79 FC:T TO m At.CtE POINT THEREOF. THENCE SOUTH 87'54 25* EAST ALONC WE BCVNDART OF SAID PARCEL 1151 FEET THENCE WHIN SAID PARCE; SOUTH 07D605' WtST 2D 41 FEET THENCE NORTH a"3 W AtSI. 77 St FEET 10 THE NEST -)N= OF PF=CEL IC -NC THE EAST MARGIN Or SAtn RAILROAD RIP117-CF^NAY, 'tiiCNCE NORTH 02V3'OS' EAST, ALOHO TI,E WEST UNE AA40 EAST 4ARGIN. EREGr. 59352 FEET TO THE THIIF P NT DERF "N 1 ALL W WEST TtALF OF SECTION 25, 101tiV911P 2J NORE-rt. RA110E 4 LA-4y, Wit CITY OF RENTON. KVIG COUNTY NA COHTAININC 14.225 SOJARE FEET VORL LJt tFSS RIFMAP,`i DiANIS Y-klnAit 4- 11430C]1tiiS. INC .� Saerwvora -- �res! -aaa+ the ►�A VIM two,estit, y�wr R>tti VAMW PMW _ Ir 11.62 cats CCT W O-063 IME I ti 3 N IT tri it/71' >aat vu m AP" MIX is 7e . '- e • IICL _n- - 5EP-05-2002 13 15 Warren Barber S Fontes P 09/12 WHEREAS, Sound Transit has achieved 90% of the design of the Longactes station and Sound Transit has expended $1 million on the tenpacary station, S9 million to obtain the property for the station and associated parting, and $500,000 to T W,000 In design work for the pv=a=t station; and WHEREAS. the Longacres Ststion 13 located on the boundaries between the South and East King County sub areas and will pfovnde &ect benefits to the cltizms of the City of Renton, which is in the East King County sub area; and WPIE.REAS, Sound Transit has a budget for construction of the Lon gams station limited to $53 million; and WHEREAS, Sound Transit has committed in its environmental doeuMmts to contribute to the Soutb le Street development in Renton; and NVM1 EAS, Sound Transit ongtnally allocated funds for two HOV direct access interchanges within Renton at the approximate original estimated cost of $80 milbon; and cv VIM EAS, those two HOY direct access interchanges could not be beult for the original 0 c �o estimamd amounts, based on Dew design standards and accommodating the 1-405 corridor ca o widening.' Sound Transit, with Reotom's support, a mcrtded Sound Move to.rr-place the two HOV d a access projects witb a direct access project at N. 8`° and other HOV improvements in N Renton, contingent upon identificc4ou of a project comsistmA with Sound Moves and available funding, and WIMRE,AS; other efforts we ongoing which might make other ttnProvetnertts more feasible, sorb efforts including the Washington State Depa==t of Transportatioa's widcwttg of 1-405 and Referendum 51 and the Regional Transportation Impmvexaient District; NOW, TIMtEFORE, the parties do hereby avee as follows: Page 2 SEP-M-2002 13 16 Warren Barber & Fontes P 11/12 a) Renton will pursue finding to continue the design and environnwrital work on the SW 27"' 1 Strandet Blvd. improvement_ Rcoton has spent $340,000 for a report which includes 5% design and has a grant with local match for $1 million Tukwila has committed to provide an additional $800,000 for that work. The City of Renton will subnait for a Transportation Improvement Board grant, and other grants and funds available to finalize and build this Mprovenieilt. The total cost is estimated to be ovar S40 million (54p,000,000)_ Renton will be the lead agency in pursuing this project. b) Sound I ansit will do the following: i Extend the usage of the interim station for tip to 10 years: ii Estimate the cost to provide necessary, temporary improvements to the interim station to extend iu useful Iife, and perform such improvements; tit_ Put the final design of the Longwres station on ho)d; and iv. Pledge to keep the South King County sub area monies commmtted to the %ngacre.3 station constriction oar hold for that pro)cct, which shall be the total South Kvtg County sub area participation in the project_ c) Renton and Sound Transit agree to partner with each other, Tukwila, the Washington State Departmcntof Transportaoon, Union pacific Railroad, Burlington Northern/Sants fe Railroad, and other pames-in-inteiest in seeking additional funding for the SW 27h I Strander Blvd extension, relocation of the Union Pacific Railroad trackage, and Tukwila's transit -oriented development plan. d) Renton acknowledges that it has rNmsted Sound Transit w May the pernaaneat Longwrcn station, wluch Sound Transit would have otherwise wstalW by 2004 as Page 4 SEP OS'2001 13 09 RFCEIV6D FROM 11SISS-011 d .cz> - CF f ASI iiNG O I r.s. CaaR�q of I% i. BARBARA MINER, Clerk of the Superior Court" of the State tri Wwhlrigton, for the County OfKing,original King, d he ereby certify s that I havo compared the foregoing copy with t.n,^ seine appeArs an file and of record in my office, and that the same is a trjo and pedoct transcript of said original and of the whole thereof. i; • n;�;C;�'{ WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed ttm Superwr Court at my offica at Seattle this per--- eay Olt 2OuuL BARBA Mi R error Cou rk RL'TH M- P A Cl . 0 After recording return document to. PHAROS Corporation Andy Roderick P.O. Box 1569 Edmonds WA 98020 Document Title: QUIT CLAIM DEED Grantor: CENTRAL PUGET SOUND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY Grantee: CITY OF RENTON Legal Description: Portion of W 1/2, SEC 25, TWN 23 N, RNG 04 E, W.M. Additional Legal Description: on attached EXHIBIT "A" Assessor's Tax Parcel Numbers: Portions of 2523049004 QUIT CLAIM DEED The Grantor, CENTRAL PUGET SOUND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, a Washington regional transit authority, for and in consideration of the sum of TEN and N0/100 Dollars ($10.00), and other valuable considerations, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, grants and conveys to Grantee, the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington, the following described real estate, situated in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington: See attached EXHIBIT "A" Dated this P 9 day of &VW -2-4 2005. CENTRAL PUGET SOUND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY, a Washington-re-giona trauthority Phil O'Dell Director, Project Delivery Support Deed No. 02 Office of Legal Counsel Approved as to Form: By: BNSF Project No. 5201.47.A NO MARK IN THE MARGIN SPACE - RESERVED FOR COUNTY AUDITOR'S USE ONLY. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Phil O'Dell is the person who appeared before me and that he acknowledged that he signed this instrument, on oath stated that he was authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Director, Project Delivery Support of the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority, to be the free and voluntary act of such party for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. GIVEN under my hand and official seal the day and year last above written. JOHN T. MDEXPIRES Notary Public in and for the State of Washington NOTARY Print Name �� % � �la h STATE OF WA COMMISSIOResiding in APRIL My Commission Expires D EXHIBIT "A" BNSF/ST COMMUTER RAIL, SEATTLE TO TACOMA PARCEL TAKING DESCPoPTION CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SITE 15, PROJECT NO. 5201.47.A COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ORDER NO. W5594, NOVEMBER 7, 2001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: THAT PORTION.OF A TRACY OF LAND CONVEYED BY BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD PROPERTIES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, TO THE CITY OF RENTON. A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION UNDER A QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY NO. 9205141447, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; SAID TRACT BEING PARCEL 1C, EXHIBIT "A" OF SAID QUIT CLAIM DEED, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1C ON THE EAST MARGIN OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY 100 FOOT RIGHT—OF—WAY; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND EAST MARGIN OF SAID RIGHT—OF—WAY, 536.32 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF B GINNING THENCE NORTH 47'06'05" EAST, WITHIN SAID PARCEL, 74.98 FEET TO THE EAST LINE THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 04'09'32" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF, 38.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'06'05" WEST, 52.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, 516.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87'53'55" EAST, 40.00 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE MOST NORTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL 1C; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 25.79 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 87'58'25" EAST, ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF SAID PARCEL, 17.51 FEET; THENCE WITHIN SAID PARCEL SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, 28.41 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87'53'55" WEST, 77.51 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF PARCEL 1C AND THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID RAILROAD RIGHT—OF—WAY; THENCE NORTH 02'06'05" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE AND EAST MARGIN THEREOF, 593.52 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BE(3INNIN .- ALL IN WEST HALF OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WA.; CONTAINING 16,225 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. RE4ISED GRD 01/17/02 y4 r11� SOUNDTIUNSff T' J �� r1r� t 01 PRO ECT NO.: CR-063 PAGE 1 OF 3 DRAWN BY: GRD DATE 12/06/0) CHECKED: DTN DATE: 12/06/01 DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC, — Surveyors 1692E wooaMnur-RMU0W Rom, 8-102 (425) 40-53M Yoo0NA1E. WWW CM 05072 FAX (aa) 4e0-4eSD PARCEL AREA:. 783,648 TAKE AREA: 16,225, ASSESSOR NO.: 2523049004 DATE 12 D6 01 OWNER: _ Cl7Y OF RENTON . COMMUTER RAIL TRANSR SYSTEM MP 11.4X SITE NO.: 15 PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A c' I I I I 1 I I i I I 1 1 I I 1 I 11 T I I I SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E, W.M. I I KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON I I I... } I NORTH LINE HENRY A. ME'ADER DLC46 I Oliv 150 Q D; hLL W Z 3'k o I NORTH LINEBO£INC S LONCACRfS PARCEL 'C" J 0 W I p h ASPHALT ROADWAY p 1/16 SECTION LINE SO4'09J2E.-------- - ----- J8.45' I F s N47116105E I . 74.98' 1 � SW 27TH S,T a 0 S47 06 05'W 52,63'wo CI, I J �•Irr,v o i S875355 £ i V pr,R P 40.00' H S02V6105-W. 25.79' I i - ONE INCH S8715825 E 17.51' I AT FULL SCALE. IF NOT ONE INCH 10' SCALE ACCORDINGLY S 9 s I V875825'W 1BO9.18, S02-06'05"W 28.41' I PnRn'�� C.4, 'j, I h R�1 N87'5J'55'W I 7A51' Vlrri p ti j' N NB7 5B 25 -W 1624. 00' I I — Nw 1/4 NE.1/4 --- 25---------------- -- 3 sw I/4 I SE I/4 o I GEND N PROPOSED EASEMENT '�^ I PROPERTY LINE — - — PUBLIC R/W 1 — BNSF RA .1 5B25-W I 25 SECTION CENTER 249.45' D GOVERNMENT LOT y� SOUNDTRANSR DUANE HARTMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. — Surveyors — 1592e ►GOOIWAIlE-MMIOND NWD. 9-107 (425) W-S755 WOONAUL YA%"-M 98072 FAX (425) W-4650 COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM MP 11.4K D CRB 01/17/02 ECT NO.: CR-063 PAGE 2 OF 3 141 BY: GR8 DATE: 12/06/01 KED: DTH DATE: 12/06/01 :EL AREA: 783,648 TAKE AREA: 16,225 SSOR NO.: 2523049004 R: _CITY OF RENTON DATE: 12/06/01 NO.: 15 PARCEL NO.: 5201.41.A SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E, W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON RE115ED CRB 01/17/02 Q �y mr . PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PAGE 3 OF 3 DRAWN BY: CRB DATE: 12/06/01 i11 SOUNDTRANSTT p «,• CHECKED: DTH DATE. 12/06/01 DUANE AARTMAN k ASSOCIATES, INC. o. PARCEL AREA: 7B3.648 TAKE AREA: 16,225 — Surveyors —+, nx ASSESSOR NO.: 2523049004 DATE: 12 O6 Ot 1e92e woOiN�nuc-1actt+an an+n, 0-107 (125) 4e0-sass �oru. �—�-^ Y00WHILL& WA20 fON "012 FAX (425) 465-4650 osrax n OWNER: gTY OF RENTON COUMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM Up 11.0 SITE NO.: PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A When Recorded Return to: PHAROS Corporation Andy Roderick P.O. Box 1569 Edmonds, WA. 98020 EASEMENT Grantor(s): CITY OF RENTON Grantee: THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE ,RAILWAY COMPANY Abbreviated Legal Description: Portions of. West'/z of Section 25, Township 23 N, Range 4 E., W.M. Assessor's Property Tax Parcel Account Number(s): 252304-9004 KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the state of Washington, herein after referred to as Grantor, for Ten and No/100 Dollars ($10.00) to it paid by THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, whose address for purposes of this instrument is 2500 Lou Menk Drive — AOB 3, Fort Worth, Texas, 76131-2830, herein after referred to as Grantee, and the promises of the Grantor hereinafter specified, does hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the Grantee, subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, an EASEMENT for railroad purposes including, but not limited to, construction, replacement, repair, maintenance and operation of railroad tracks, retaining wall, fiber optic cable lines and associated appurtenant equipment and facilities, hereinafter called track, over, under, upon and across the following described premises, situated in King County, State of Washington, to -wit: • See attached Exhibit "A" The foregoing easement is made subject to and upon the following express conditions: l.The Grantor on behalf of itself, its successors and assigns, covenants and agrees not to construct any additional structures or grant any additional uses within the easement area that will interfere with the uses of the property by the Grantee for railroad operations. 2.This easement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, assigns and successors of Grantor and Grantee. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, together with all the hereditaments and appurtenances thereunto belonging to Grantee for its use and enjoyment for the purposes aforesaid and for no other purpose whatsoever subject to the terms and conditions hereinbefore stated. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has caused this instrument to be signed by its authorized officers on the day of , 2005. M CITY OF RENTON Kathey Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor THEIkE INGTON NORTHERN AND SAN RAILWAY COMPANY By Attest: Jody Jones Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk Senior Real Estate Manager STATE OF WASHINGTON ) :ss COUNTY OF ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kathy Keolker-Wheeler signed this instrument on oath and stated that she is authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the Mayor of the City of Renton, a municipal corporation of the State of Washington. Given under my hand and official seal or stamp this _ day of DATED: (Signature) (Please print name legibly) 2005. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington My commission expires STATE OF TEXAS ) ) ss. COUNTY OF TARRANT ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that JODY JONES is the person who appeared before me, and said person acknowledged that he/she was the SENIOR REAL ESTATE MANAGER of THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, and that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument as the free and voluntary act of said corporation for the uses and purposes mentioned in the foregoing instrument. DATED: (Signature) 1(s(I-4im PATRICIA R. COXNotary hibMeSTATE OF TEXAS(Please print name legibly) rcomin. Erv.03/1s/200a NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Texas My commission expires 0:3 - 16 - dZ DD $ EXHIBIT "A" BNSF/ST COMMUTER RAIL, SEATTLE TO TACOMA PARCEL TAKING DESCRIPTION CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION SITE 15; PROJECT NO. 5201.47.A COMMONWEALTH LAND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ORDER NO. 905594, NOVEMBER 7, 2001 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: ' THAT PORTION OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED BY BURLINGTON. NORTHERN RAILROAD PROPERTIES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, TO THE CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION UNDER A QUIT CLAIM DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY NO, 9205141447. RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; SAID TRACT BEING PARCEL 1C, EXHIBIT "A" OF SAID QUIT CLAIM DEED, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS; COMMENCING AT THE MOST NORTHERLY CORNER OF SAID PARCEL 1C ON THE EAST MARGIN OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN AND SANTA FE RAILWAY COMPANY 100 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID PARCEL AND EAST MARGIN OF SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY, 536.32 FEET TO. THE TRUE POINT OF B ItJNiN THENCE NORTH 47'06'05" EAST, WITHIN SAID PARCEL, 74.98 FEET TO THE EAST LINE THEREOF; THENCE SOUTH 04'09'32" EAST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF, 38.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'06'05" WEST, 52.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST, 498.03 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50'01'21" EAST, 53.90 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THE MOST NORTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL 1-C; THENCE SOUTH 02'06'05" WEST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 55.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50*01*21" WEST, 80.84 FEET TO THE EAST MARGIN OF SAID RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE NORTH 02'06'05" EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE AND EAST MARGIN THEREOF, 593.52 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, ALL IN WEST HALF OF SECTION .25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WA.; CONTAINING 15.580 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. REVISED GRB 05/22/02 •a T PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PACE 1 Of 3 DRAWN BY: GRB DATE: 12/06/01 i SQ I�/+� i.a SODNDTRAN�rf p CHECKED: DTH DATE 12/06/01 DUANE WTMAN k ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL AREA: 78J 646 TAKE AREA: 15.5110 SO FT — Surveyors — • OIMIN 1692A WOAE-REDIOND ROAD. 0-107 (425) T65-5355 ��,. t ASSESSOR NO.: 252J049004 DATE: 12/O6/01 w000MU , WASI"TON 98072 FAX (425) 03-4650 r�Es m OWNER: CITY OF RENTON COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM MP 11.41( SITE NO.: _15— PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON I I I NORTH LINE HENRY A. MEADER OLC 146 1 01 iy I I50 I q Inc J CO (� I NORTH LINE SO£INC'S O LONCACR£S PARCEL C" O Q I I Y 1 o ASPHALT ROADWAY' Q O ".� -- _____ I 1/J6 SECTION LINE _ ----'— SO409'32"f-------- N4706.05'£ I SW 27TH ST 74.98' I • S470s 05`W I rF�s I° h ' v 526J' g ° 2 I 1 "=300' . I ONE INCH I I10'0' I AT FULL SCALE. IF NOT ONE INCH I SCALE ACCORDINGLY . , I 1 N87 58'25 "W 1808.18' S02106105'W .5.5.06 (50 IN5001'217f 0 53. 90• ( w 3 S500121"W 80.84' I - 1 I I. N87 58 25 "ly 1624.00' . 1 I — — — I NW 1/4 NE 1/4 25------. I— 1 SW 1/4 — — — — — — — SE 1/4 — — - LEGEND o I 3 N I PROPOSED EASEMENT o H PROPERTY LINE h I PUBLIC R/W — - BNSF R/W I 25 SECTION. CENTER Ne7s8z5"ly 249.45' I - p GOVERNMENT LOT REVISED CR8 05/22/02 PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PAGE 2 OF 3 DRAWN BY: CRD DATE: 12/06/01 SOUNDTRANSR p �* o • sd • , `g4 CHECKED: OTH DATE: 12/06/01 DUANE HARTW k ASSOCIATES, INC, — Surveyors — PARCEL AREA. 783,648 TAKE AREA: 15.560 SO FT ASSESSOR NO.: 2523049004 DATE: 12/06/01 I692e woaoumuF-9EGualG nom. a-197 (iss) 483-5355 UA WGODWVUE, WASWNGTON 96072 . fAX (425) 1e3-4650 pEs OWNER: CITY OF RENTON COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEU UP IIAX SITE NO.: 1_ PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A I SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23N, RANGE 4E, W.M. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON �2 WK1'YILA SW GRPGf VW PY .yL . SW 16TH ST � I J ti 181 Q ;< - I Q rn cq1 � J < 1� Ln ILi 11 I Y < ,O I ^l I w I I SW 27TH ST _I I r 1 t S1 TE 15 PROJECT N0.1 5201,47.A ' I . MINITY MAP NOT TO SCALE REGISED GRB 05/22/02 PROJECT NO.: CR-063 PAGE 3 OF 3 DRAWN BY: GRB DATE: 12/06/01 4i11� SOUNDTRANSfT 4:` CHECKED: DTH GATE: 12/06/01 DUANE IRRTMAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. PARCEL AREA: 763.646 TAKE AREA: 15.5 00 SO FT — Su"evnrs— y ., ° �•'` 1697e Wn000mit-aFnuoNo MAD. 8-107 (475) 4u-sass v4 � try ASSESSOR NO.:_2523049004 - DATE: 01 12 06 11— WOMMA WASHNGTON 95079 FAX (425) 03-1550 a w OWNER: CITY OF RENTON COMMUTER RAIL TRANSIT SYSTEM MP 11.0 SITE NO.: 15 PARCEL NO.: 5201.47.A i CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Al N: Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of- Dept/Div/Board.. Transportation Systems February 14, 2005 Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Nick Afzali, x7245 Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Subject: Correspondence.. I-405 Mainline Alignment — Renton Western City Limit Ordinance ............. to SR 169 Concurrence Letter Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Concurrence Letter Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept......... X Refer to the Transportation (Aviation) Committee 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 Administration and City Council have provided input to the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) regarding the alignment of I-405 in the Master Plan, specifically widening of I-405 and the impacts to properties on both sides of the freeway from Tukwila city limits to Renton City Hall. The mainline alignment minimizes impacts to businesses as much as possible. The Committee of the Whole was briefed on the mainline alignment on December 13, 2004, and the Washington State Department of Transportation gave a presentation to Council on December 20, 2004. Establishing concurrence regarding the I-405 Master Plan alignment is necessary in order to establish the design and location of the Benson Road overpass, which is to be replaced as part of the Nickel Projects, scheduled for construction beginning in 2007. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton city limit to SR 169. N:\TRANS\ADMIN\AGENDA 2005\1 405 Mainline Alignment Agenda Bill CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 14, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA: Mayor Kathy KeolkerWheeler FROM: �` Gregg Zimmermar6Aam-W�inistrator STAFF CONTACT: Nick Afzali, Transportation Planning and Programming Manager x7245 SUBJECT: I-405 Mainline Alignment — Renton Western City Limit to SR 169 Concurrence Letter ISSUE: Approval is needed for the Mayor to provide the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) a concurrence signature regarding the I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton city limit to SR 169. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton city limit to SR 169. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The October 2002 I-405 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) established the Master Plan concept for I-405. The 5-cent gas tax enacted by the State Legislature in 2003 provides for the Nickel Projects in Renton and 5% design of the Master Plan in Renton. The Administration and City Council have provided input to WSDOT regarding the alignment of I-405 in the Master Plan, specifically widening of I-405 and the impacts to properties on both sides of the freeway from Tukwila city limits to Renton City Hall. The mainline alignment minimizes impacts to businesses as much as possible. I-405 Mainline Alignment Concurrence Letter Issue Paper Page 2 The Committee of the Whole was briefed on the mainline alignment on December 13, 2004, and the Washington Department of Transportation gave a presentation to Council on December 20, 2004. Establishing concurrence regarding the I-405 Master Plan alignment is necessary in order to establish the design and location of the Benson Road overpass, which is to be replaced as part of the Nickel Projects. HATRANSkADNWAGENDAS 2005N I-405 Mainline Alignment Issue Paper Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 — 108`h Ave NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 January 7, 2005 Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Re: I-405 Mainline Alignment — Renton Western City Limit to SR 169 Concurrence Letter This letter documents that the City of Renton and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) concur with the I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton city limit to SR 169. How are I405 Proiects Defined, Funded and Phased? As you know, the I-405 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement was approved by the FHWA and FTA in October 2002 with a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD identified the Selected Alternative (the I-405 Master Plan) which provided transportation improvements throughout the I-405 study area including a conceptual mainline alignment. The design detail provided in the Selected Alternative is conceptual design, or approximately one percent design. In spring 2003, the Washington State Legislature approved a Nickel Funding Package providing more than $4 billion over 10 years for a variety of highway improvements throughout the state. One of these "Nickel Projects" is on I-405 and SR 167 in the City of Renton. The $136 million Renton Nickel Project is the first step toward achieving the I-405 Master Plan. The NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Renton Nickel Project will begin January 2005, and project construction is scheduled to begin in 2007. Part of the Renton Nickel Project funds work to advance the I-405 Master Plan "footprint" through the City of Renton. Footprint design ensures that the Renton Nickel Project is consistent with the Master Plan and that it does not unintentionally constrain the Master Plan Projects. What is the I-405 Mainline Alignment? A mainline alignment concept is provided in the I-405 ROD. To improve upon the alignment concept, WSDOT and the City closely examined alignment options: widen to the left, widen to the right, symmetrical, and combination. The combination alignment incorporates alignment choices from the left, right and symmetrical options. The alignment screening matrix is attached. The combination alignment was advanced for 5% design. The combination alignment was further evaluated by two options: minimize business impacts and minimize residential neighborhood impacts. Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton Page 2 January 7, 2005 The resulting mainline alignment, combination minimizing business impacts, was put forth to the City's Executive/Administrators Committee in May 2004 and again November 2004. The Executive/Administrators Committee recommended the alignment on December 6, 2004. The Renton City Council confirmed the mainline alignment on December 20, 2004. The Benson Structure — Why is there a need for Footprint Certainty? . The project team needs to understand the location of the Benson over crossing structure, which is an improvement common to both the Renton Nickel Project and the I-405 Master Plan. Funding has been authorized to construct the Benson structure as part of the Renton Nickel Project; funding to construct the Master Plan is uncertain. Two future Master Plan components influence the location and design of the Benson structure: the I-405 mainline alignment and the proposed reconstructed I-405 / SR 167 interchange. These Master Plan components need to be understood at a footprint level to ensure that the Renton Nickel Project does not unintentionally constrain these future projects. The I-405 / SR 167 interchange is covered in a separate concurrence letter dated January 7, 2005. What are the I405 Mainline Alignment Next Steps? The Renton Nickel Project Environmental Assessment will kick off January 25, 2005 with an agency scoping meeting. The public open house is scheduled for January 7, 2005. The Nickel Project's 15% design has recently begun. WSDOT will work closely with City staff to refine the mainline alignment as the engineering progresses from 5% to 15% design. The project team will consider the I-405 mainline alignment as they progress the Benson structure design. The Benson structure design and location will be evaluated in the Renton Nickel EA. Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton Page 3 January 7, 2005 Concurrence I am anticipating a project that will set a high standard of cooperation between the City and WSDOT. By signing below, the City and WSDOT concur with the I-405 mainline alignment from the western Renton city limit to SR 169 as we move into the Renton Nickel Project EA. Sincerely, Craig J. Stone, PE I-405 Project Director City of Renton Concurrence: Kathy Keolker - Wheeler Date Mayor, City of Renton cc: Administrators Executive Committee members City Design Team members City Traffic Analysis Task Force members I-405 Project Files Attachments CJS:sct y ail nd Ilk q JEW A 0$S... BUSINESS" �r, 'ONT L - 7-A -,A ISITJQNS,: (0!!E. III, TWO'ltENT<W,,* yy: - % - 3 lo BENSON R 'UND -A T 90t rgItc od e 4 k y 6 44. Alf 0P . . . . . . . ... 7 'r FPRELIMINARY LFGFN I. -OS 7. 1 T WEST V LLEY HjGwVAY TO ULT1.7c PLM T Ar 41 41. Z-14, 41r j N41M �771'f PRELIMINARY ILI' IGvll yf PL. 1-405 CONGESTION RELIEF AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SECTION THREE (WEST OF SR-167) IMPACT SUMMARY Page 1 Y a X C E is A 0 ayi E Y 5 t E E a/0 E E c 6 p o o E TL 0 o 2 mini E " E m y ` o A N >v _�g `0 Y gn m� _Y ° y = q N ao Q to of c oic cm E° E¢ E5 E$ a w z d �m ProDescription w ' m m' 3 8 '0'�X ect CommentsAssues Lett Widening • O p O O p • O 011 O • Right Widening O p O p • O O • p' • • O Symmetric Widening • O p O • p • • p • • O Combination 1 (Minimizing Impacts to Talbot Hill) O p O p p O O • p• • O Combination 2 (Minimizing Impacts to Renton Place) O p O p p O O • p LID • O O = Low impacts p - Moderate Impacts • = High impacts X - Fatal Flaw Roadway Impacts Environmental Impacts O = No impacts O = Low impacts p = Reconstruction with no structures p = Moderate impacts • = Reconstruction with structures • - High impacts Property Impacts Utility Impacts O = No impacts O - No impacts p = Land Impact (land impact w/o complete parcel acquistion) p - Moderate impacts (covers utility with freeway) • = Property Acquis6on (major land and/or building acquistion) • = High impacts (requires relocation/reconstruction) DRAFF 1 -Jan. 14, 2004 UPDATED 12-23-04 Mainline Comparison Matrix_rl 1.405 CONGESTION RELIEF AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SECTION FOUR (1-405/SR-167 IC) IMPACT SUMMARY n m p m N $ � a e O ko Q os = y^ g° $' _ C _ 0. W E6 p m 9 o Proect Description W LL ci O i 8 a Comments/Issuea Left Widening • s • O • G • O • • • O Right Widening O O • G O O • • • • • Symmetric Widening • • • • O G • • • • • Combination 1 (Minimizing Impacts to Talbot Hill) • O • • G • C • • • G Combination 2 (Minimizing Impacts to Renton Place) O O • 101 O O • • • • • v = Low impactm G = Moderate impacts • = High impacts X = Fatal Flaw Roadway Impacts Environmental Impacts O - No impacts O - low impacts G = Reconstruction with no structures G - Moderate Impacts • = Reconstruction with structures • - High Impacts Property Impacts Utility Impacts O = No Impacts O - No impacts G - Land Impact (lend impact w/o complete parcel acquishon) G - Moderate impacts (covers utility with freeway) • = Property Acqutstion (major land and/or building acquistion) • - High impacts (requires relocatioivreconstruction) Mainline Comparison Matrix_ri Page 2 D n FT . Jan. 14, 2004 UPDATED 12-23.04 M 1-405 CONGESTION RELIEF AND BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT SECTION FIVE (EAST OF SR-167) IMPACT SUMMARY `A pp A E t3 E E as � � �' � •y 2 E �` m Qc c3 v E o c iW S Proect Desch tion w` I CommentsAssues Left Widening O O • ; O • i Right Widening z • • O 3 • • Symmetric Widening ! G • O Combination 1 (Minimizing Impacts to Talbot Hill) • O O i O • 2 (Minimizing Impacts to Renton Place) •O AOCombination • O = Low impacts G - Moderate impacts • = High impacts X= Fatal Flaw ProDertv Impacts O = No unpects G = Land Impact pand impact w/o complete parcel acquistion) • = Property Acquistion (major land and/or building acquistion) Environmental Impacts O = Low impacts G - Moderate impacts • = High impacts Utility Imoacts O = No impacts C = Moderate impacts (covers utility with freeway) • = High impacts (requires relocatior✓reconstruction) Mainline Comparison Matrix_rl Page 3 D RAFT - Jan. 14, 2004 UPDATED 12.23-04 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL fv a: Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of- Dept/Div/Board.. Transportation Systems February 14, 2005 Agenda Status Staff Contact...... Nick Afzali, x7245 Consent .............. Public Hearing.. Subject: Correspondence.. I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design Concurrence Ordinance ............. Letter Resolution............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Issue Paper Study Sessions...... Concurrence Letter Information......... Recommended Action: Approvals: Legal Dept......... X Refer to the Transportation (Aviation) Committee 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 I-405/SR 167 interchange concept was developed in the I-405 Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) record of decision and the subsequent design charette. Advanced for 5% design is a split - diamond interchange configuration with frontage roads between Lind Avenue SW and Talbot Road South. The Committee of the Whole was briefed on this interchange concept on December 13, 2004, and the Washington State Department of Transportation gave a presentation to Council on December 20, 2004. Establishing concurrence regarding the I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design is necessary in order to establish the design and location of the Benson Road overpass which is to be replaced as part of the Nickel Projects, scheduled for construction beginning in 2007. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design. H:\TRANS\ADMIN\AGENDA 2005\1405-167 Interchange 5% Agenda Bill CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 14, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA:Mayor Kathy Keolker-Wheeler as FROM: Gregg Zimmermai , dministrator STAFF CONTACT: Nick Afzali, Transportation Planning and Programming Manager x7245 SUBJECT: I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design Concurrence Letter ISSUE: Approval is needed for the Mayor to provide the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) a concurrence signature regarding the I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design. RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to provide a concurrence signature to the Washington State Department of Transportation regarding the I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: The October 2002 I-405 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) established the Master Plan concept for I-405. The 5-cent gas tax enacted by the State Legislature in 2003 provides for the Nickel Projects in Renton and 5% design of the Master Plan in Renton. The I-405/SR 167 interchange concept developed in the EIS record of decision and the subsequent design charette addresses two primary goals — to improve system -to -system operations and to improve local traffic circulation, such as the Rainier Avenue/Grady Way intersection. The concept advanced for 5% design is a split -diamond interchange configuration with frontage roads between Lind Avenue SW and Talbot Road South. Provided as an attachment to the concurrence letter is a memo detailing this interchange recommendation, including traffic forecasting, operational modeling, and other evaluation factors. Staff worked closely with the I-405 Project Team to analyze operations of the proposed I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design Concurrence Letter February 14, 2005 Page 2 interchange, including options with and without bypasses. Bypasses provide the ability for traffic destined to/from Talbot Road to not travel through a traffic signal at Lind Avenue, and vice versa for traffic destined to/from Lind Avenue SW. Detailed staff comments regarding traffic operations of the recommended interchange are addressed in the interchange recommendation memo. The Committee of the Whole was briefed on this interchange concept on December 13, 2004, and the Washington State Department of Transportation gave a presentation to Council on December 20, 2004. Establishing concurrence regarding the I-405/SR 167 Interchange 5% Design is necessary in order to establish the design and location of the Benson Road overpass, which is to be replaced as part of the Nickel Projects. HATRANS\A N9N\AGENDA 2005\1405 SR167Interchange 5% Issue Paper.doc Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 January 7, 2005 Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Re: I-405 / SR 167 Interchange 5% Design Concurrence Letter This letter documents that the City of Renton and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) concur with the I-405 / SR 167 interchange 5% design. How are I405 Projects Defined, Funded and Phased? As you know, the I-405 Corridor Environmental Impact Statement was approved by the FHWA and FTA in October 2002 with a Record of Decision (ROD). The ROD identified the Selected Alternative (the I-405 Master Plan) which provided transportation improvements throughout the I-405 study area including a conceptual I-405 / SR 167 interchange configuration. The design detail provided in the Selected Alternative is conceptual design, or approximately one percent design. In spring 2003, the Washington State Legislature approved a Nickel Funding Package providing more than $4 billion over 10 years for a variety of highway improvements throughout the state. One of these "Nickel Projects" is on I-405 and SR 167 in the City of Renton. The $136 million Renton NicI&I Project is the first step toward achieving the I-405 Master Plan. The NEPA Environmental Assessment (EA) for the Renton Nickel Project will begin January 2005, and project construction is scheduled to begin in 2007. Part of the Renton Nickel Project funds work to advance the I-405 Master Plan "footprint" through the City of Renton. Footprint design ensures that the Renton Nickel Project is consistent with the Master Plan and that it does not unintentionally constrain the Master Plan Projects. What is the I405 / SR 167 Interchange Design Concept? An I-405 / SR 167 interchange concept is provided in the I-405 ROD. To improve upon this interchange concept, WSDOT and the City participated in the I405 / SR 167 interchange design charette May 28 through May 31, 2002. The charette team had two primary goals — to improve "system -to -system" (I-405 to SR 167) operations and to improve local traffic circulation. Another goal was to improve the City's Rainier Avenue and Grady intersection, which is the City's highest accident location. Charette Concept 2D -- a split diamond configuration with frontage roads between Lind and Talbot -- met these goals, and Concept 2D was advanced for 5% design. Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton Page 2 January 7, 2005 What is the I405 / SR 167 Interchange 5% Design? The 5% design is the preliminary design effort that defines the Master Plan footprint. For the I- 405 / SR 167 interchange, the 5% design is based off of the best information and forecasting tools available in 2004 to predict the I-405 / SR 167 interchange operational needs in 2030. Please refer to the attached documents, 1-405 Lind -Talbot Interchange Recommendation" memo and the October 14, 2004 letter, for a detailed description of the interchange and the factors evaluated in the interchange design screening process. The project team has worked closely with City staff to examine the assumptions used to develop the interchange solution and to evaluate the results of the I405 traffic forecasting and operational modeling software. The interchange design meets City and State standards. The resulting I-405 / SR 167 interchange 5% design, a split diamond configuration with access at both Lind and Talbot with no by-passes, was put forth to the City's Executive/Administrators Committee in May 2004 and again November 2004. The Executive/Administrators Committee recommended the interchange concept on December 6, 2004. The concept was presented December 20, 2004 to Renton City Council for confirmation. The Benson Structure — Why is there a need for Footprint Certainty? The project team needs to understand the location of the Benson over crossing structure, which is an improvement common to both the Renton Nickel Project and the I-405 Master Plan. Funding has been authorized to construct the Benson structure as part of the Renton Nickel Project; funding to construct the Master Plan is uncertain. Two future Master Plan components influence the location and design of the Benson structure: the I405 mainline alignment and the proposed reconstructed I-405 / SR 167 interchange. These Master Plan components need to be understood at a footprint level to ensure that the Renton Nickel Project does not unintentionally constrain these future projects. The mainline alignment is covered in a separate concurrence letter dated January 7, 2005. When will we Refine the Interchange Design and Make Final Decisions? Once project funds are available, the project team will advance the 5% preliminary design to 15% design and prepare a NEPA environmental document. Progressing from 5% preliminary design to 15% design is termed "design refinement". The 5% engineering work done to date will shape the 15% design examined in the NEPA document. WSDOT will work closely with City staff during design refinement to revisit the design assumptions and the design concept as the 15% design is developed. Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton Page 3 January 7, 2005 Concurrence I am anticipating a project that will set a high standard of cooperation between the City and WSDOT. By signing below, the City and WSDOT concur with the 5% I405 / SR 167 interchange design as we move into the Renton Nickel Project EA. The City and WSDOT commit to work together to refine the interchange as the 15% design is developed in a future NEPA environmental document once funding becomes available. Sincerely, Craig J. S one, PE I-405 Project Director City of Renton Concurrence: Kathy Keolker - Wheeler Date Mayor, City of Renton cc: Administrators Executive Committee members City Design Team members City Traffic Analysis Task Force members I-405 Project Files Attachments CJS:sct Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects October 14, 2004 Mr. Nick Afzali Planning and Programming Manager City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. Afzali: 600 —10811 Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 This letter is to follow up on the IA05 Corridor meeting held October 11, 2004. In that meeting, the IA05 team presented information the City of Renton requested regarding the traffic forecasts and design options associated with the proposed Lind Avenue SW. and Talbot Road S. interchange. Attached are electronic files of the Synchro results as well as Corsim animation based on the analysis we have completed. Traffic Volumes As we presented in the meeting, the 1-405 team has reassigned future traffic volumes in this area to allow local traffic to use the frontage roads in the interchange. We also have increased the southbound 1-405 off -ramp and on -ramp volume by 200 vehicles during the P.M. peak hour. We feel our previous numbers are valid; however we increased the volume to provide the City with an analysis of how traffic would operate with the higher volume. Traffic Analysis The traffic analysis conducted by the 1-405 team used the Corsim analysis software. Initial signal timing, phasing and offset information was generated using the Synchro analysis software and used as input to the Corsim analysis. For year 2014 and 2030 conditions, the following parameters were used in the Corsim analysis: • 0.92 Peak Hour Factor • 2% truck on all movements • Grade values of 4-6% on sections of Lind Avenue SW. • Minimum green time to allow pedestrian movements every cycle • 110 second AM cycle length • 120 second PM cycle length Because these are future conditions, the analysis used the Highway Capacity Manual recommended Peak Hour Factor of 0.92. We feel the truck percentage is conservative by applying 2% to all movements in the study area. Truck percentages may be higher during off-peak conditions, but we feel these values are appropriate for peak conditions. The future traffic signals in the study area will likely have pedestrian call buttons but not be activated every cycle. To be conservative however, this analysis assumed enough minimum green time for pedestrian movements on every cycle. The following table identifies the 2030 peak hour intersection control delay, Level of Service (LOS), storage and maximum queue lengths for the Lind Avenue SW. and Talbot Road S. interchange intersections. Traditional traffic Nick Afzali October 14, 2004 Page 2 engineering practice evaluates 95th percentile queue, but we have used the 100% queue to again provide a conservative assessment of traffic operations. 2030 AM and PM Peak Hour Intersection Delav LOS and Queues Northbound Queue Eastbound Queue Southbound Queue Westbound Queue Intersection Control DelayLOS Left Thru RI ht Left Thru Ri ht Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Lind Ave./I-405 AM 17 B - 120' 140' 90' 159 100' 340' 340' SB Frontage Rd. PM 18 B 200' 300' 70' 80' 4W 320' 280' Storage* 200' 300' 150' 150' 250' 350' 350' Lind Ave.A-405 AM 21 1 C 130' 11 V 250' 1 260' 1 130' 290' NB Frontage Rd. PM 264 C 160' 160' 20V 320' 140' 150' stora e' 160' 160' 500' 500' 200' 300' Lind Ave./SW AM 1 14 B 79 90' 150' 60' 100' 160' 30' 180' 90, 16th PM 31 C 160' 270' 260' 130' 100, 160' 50' 150' 29V Storage* 200' 300' 100' 160' 150, 400' Talbot Rd.A-405 AM 25 C 280' 380' 2W 230' 160' 190' 120' SB Frontage Rd. PM 27 C 260' 360' 450' 160' 240' 23V 80' Stora • 300' 230' 300' 300' Talbot Rd./1-405 AM 21 C 530' 180' 210' 250' 14V 200' NB Frontage Rd. PM 26 C 290' 110' 1 290' 300' 210' 500' Storage. 300' 300' 300' 300' Talbot RdJPuget Dr. AM 29 C 40' 450' 120' 50' 250' 180' 120' 350' PM 25 C 60' 340' 80' 9o- 370' 510' 90' 210' St 220' 120' 400' 350' Storage for thru movements is shown for short segments only. As the table indicates, some of the intersections have 100% queue values equal to the storage length. In the animation files you will see that these queues clear every cycle and do not result in adverse operations over time. Additionally, as the control delay indicates, all intersections operate at LOS C or better in 2030 peak conditions. In the Corsim animations files, you may observe vehicles queuing on the frontage road as it tapers from two lanes to one. The inability to model a mainline taper is a known limitation of Corsim. With the projected volumes we feel that this taper will operate well and not result in queuing. Finally, design details such as pocket length, detailed lane channelization, will be refined as the design process Proceeds. We do however feel that the proposed concept will operate at an acceptable level with the year 2030 traffic forecasts. Compared to a 2030 Do Nothing alternative, there is significantly less delay and more vehicles served on the surrounding street network with this concept. Bypass Options Based on geometric limitations and the impact on mainline freeway operations, bypass ramps northbound at Lind Avenue SW and southbound at Talbot Road S. are not feasible. Both bypasses would either result in an unacceptable mainline weaves with the upstream interchange or require an additional off -ramp from mainline. Neither of these options would be acceptable to FHWA or WSDOT since the current option is forecasted to operate well without these additional impacts. rw f VrM.po.r u'n S.'U,T 1TrafflCUDcal C00'(r1nah0rWenb'A0 tuber 2004 Und-TaIM Lelhx.doc Ruck Afzali October 14, 2004 Page 3 Summary We feel that the traffic analysis completed by the 1405 team demonstrates the proposed Lind Avenue SW. and Talbot Avenue S. interchange concept operates at an acceptable level for year 2030 conditions. Bypass ramps are not feasible options because the current concept operates well and the bypass ramps would introduce additional impacts. If you have any questions regarding this, please contact Patty Rubstello or myself. Sin rely, Stacy C. T ler, P.E. IA05 Segment Manager Attachments: Synchro Electronic Files Corsim Animation Files AW :7i S-U5MTraft oca/ Coa*WonlRerda 0d0bw M Lind -Talbot leW doc Congestion Relief S Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —108t' Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425456-8500 Fax 425456-8600 1-405 Lind -Talbot Interchange Recommendation Presented by: City of Renton Traffic Analysis Task Force December 2004 Recommendation This document presents Option A-2 as the 1-405 Talbot / Lind interchange configuration recommended by the City of Renton Traffic Analysis Task Force. Major features of the Option A-2 include: • Half -diamond interchange on 1-405 at Lind Avenue SW • Half -diamond interchange on 1-405 at Talbot Road (SR-515) • One-way frontage road couplet connecting the two half -diamond interchanges with signalized at -grade intersections at SW Lind and Talbot Road (no frontage road bypasses for through traffic) • One-way S. Renton Village Place southbound connection with Talbot Road Project Description (1-405/SR 167 Vicinity) A key component of the 1-405 Congestion Relief and Bus Rapid Transit Projects program is the reconstruction of the 1-405 / SR-167 Interchange. Proposed improvements to the existing "clover -leaf interchange include separating local access from "system -to -system" access as follows: • Eliminates the existing loop" ramps, and adds HOV and general-purpose direct -connector ramps between 1-405 and the south leg of SR-167; • Replaces the 1-405 access at Rainier Avenue with two new half -diamond interchanges, one with 1-405 access at Lind Avenue SW and the other with 1-405 access at Talbot Road; • Provides a one-way couplet that connects these two new 1-405 half -diamond interchanges; and • Reconnects Rainier Avenue to East Valley Road, and then to SR-167 with a new half -diamond in the vicinity of SW 23°. Description of Options The task force considered several conceptual configurations for the 1-405 Talbot / Lind interchange. Two options were considered for the west half of the interchange at SW Lind Avenue. Five (5) southbound and four (4) northbound interchanges options were considered for the east half of the interchange at Talbot Road. Lind interchange configuration design options are: • Frontage road with no bypass for through traffic to and from Talbot • Frontage road with bypass for through traffic to and from Talbot Talbot interchange configuration design options are: �� Waohington State Department of Transportation 01/19/2005 SA005Voadwaylrepods0raff Recom Memo - Und-Talbot Configuratbn_v5AX Congestion Relief S Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —108"' Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 980r' Main 425-456-81, Fax 425-456-860u Southbound • Option S1: Frontage road with no bypass for through traffic to Lind and no S. Renton Village Place connection with Talbot Road • Option S2: Frontage road with no bypass for through traffic to Lind and one—way S: Renton Village Place southbound connection with Talbot Road • Option S3: Frontage road with no bypass for through traffic to Lind and two-way S. Renton Village Place connection with Talbot Road • Option S4: Frontage road with bypass for through traffic to Lind and no S. Renton Village Place connection with Talbot Road • Option S5: Frontage road with bypass for through traffic to Lind and one—way S. Renton Village Place southbound connection with Talbot Road Northbound • Option N1: Frontage road with no bypass for through traffic from Lind and'half-diamond at Talbot Road • Option N2: Not used. • Option N3: Frontage road with bypass for through traffic from Lind and loop ramp with 4-legged Talbot Road intersection • Option N4: Frontage road with_typass for through traffic from Lind and loop ramp with 5-legged Talbot Road intersection • Option N5: Not used. • Option N6: Frontage road with bypass for through traffic from Lind and half -diamond at Talbot Road _ The above interchange options could be mixed and matched to obtain the best configuration for the Lind / Talbot interchange. Design Issues and Considerations In screening the interchange options the Task Force has considered the following project functions: local operations, freeway operations, structures, and environmental. The evaluation of these functions considered the following: Local Operations: • Level of service for local roadway network, • Queuing at intersections • Vehicle travel time • Access to local businesses • Access to residential neighborhoods • Driver's expectations. Freeway Operations: • 1-405 mainline operations between Maple Valley Highway (SR-169) and the Valley Highway (SR-167) • 1-405 mainline operations between West Valley Highway (SR-181) and the Valley Highway (SR-167) • Driver's expectations. Structures: AdMk Wasftington Stag �� O�partmant of Transportation 01/19/2005 S:10MoadwayireportslDraR Re= Memo • Lind -Talbot Con(gwdtion_v5.doc Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —1080, Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 • 1-405 mainline structure over Main Avenue (near City Hall) • Southbound 1-405 to Southbound SR-167 flyover incorporated Environmental: • Property impacts to businesses in the SW Lind Avenue vicinity • Property impacts to One and Two Renton Place • Property impacts to Renton Cinema 8 • Property impacts to Berkshire Apartment complex • Property impacts to Talbot Hill residential neighborhood Local Operations The traffic analysis for the Lind/Talbot interchange showed that the local operations for all the considered options operated at an acceptable level of service with the year 2030 traffic forecasts. Bypass options did provide shorter travel times for vehicles exiting or entering 1-405 at Talbot Road and traveling to or from Lind Avenue, and for vehicles existing or entering 1-405 at Lind and traveling to or from Talbot Road. Access to Renton Place from Talbot Road was considered to be a critical element for local access; therefore, southbound Talbot options that did not provide this connection were less desirable than the options that provided this connectivity. The northbound Talbot options with the "loop ramp", both with the four -legged and five -legged intersection at Talbot, were less desirable than the northbound Talbot options with the half -diamond. The four -legged intersection option eliminated one of the primary access points into the Talbot Hill neighborhood, which could not be replaced without major impacts to the Talbot Hill neighborhood. The five4egged intersection option created another level of complication to the intersection by adding a fourth turning movement to each of the original legs of the intersection. Freeway Operations Based on geometric limitations and the impact on freeway operations, bypass ramps northbound at Lind Avenue SW and southbound at Talbot Road are not feasible. Both bypasses would either result in unacceptable mainline weaves with the upstream interchange or require an additional off -ramp from mainline. Neither of these options would be acceptable to FHWA or WSDOT since options without these bypasses are forecast to operate well without these additional impacts. Structures Additional structures are required for the bypass options over options without bypasses. Wider roadways for bypasses require wider bridge structures. In addition, the southbound Talbot bypass option requires the recently completed southbound 1-405 to southbound SR-167 flyover ramp to be reconstructed with higher speed geometrics, and requires the proposed southbound 1-405 improvements to extend over Main Avenue in the vicinity of Renton City Hall. Washlnyton stet* �� tHpartmant of Transportation 01 /19/2005 3 S.10051roadwaytreportslDraR Reoom Memo - Lind -Talbot Configtration_v5.doc Congestion Relief S Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —10811 Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 9800" Main 425-456-8F Fax 425-456-86uu Environmental All configurations have impacts on nearby properties to a varying degree. Bypass options have larger impacts to adjacent properties created by the larger "footprint" than the "no bypass" options. The bypass option at the Lind interchange requires impacting either the automobile dealership located north of 1-405 or large business complexes located south of SW 16"' Street. Both of these areas are essentially avoided with the construction of the "no bypass" option. The Talbot southbound bypass option, as discussed above in the Structures section, requires the proposed southbound 1-405 improvements to extend over Main Avenue. The impacts, created by the close proximity of the proposed 1-405 improvements and 1-405 traffic to City Hall, make this option unacceptable. Talbot northbound options all impact the Birkshire Apartment complex by removing one or two of the northernmost apartment buildings. The Talbot northbound half -diamond with bypass option impacts extend through the complex's circulation road, requiring major changes to the configuration of the complex in order to maintain emergency response access to the facility. Summary The aforementioned issues have been considered in evaluating the various proposed Lind -Talbot interchange configuration options. Based on the resulting impacts and related functions, the Task Force recommends Option A- 2, a split diamond without bypasses, as the preferred interchange configuration for the new Lind -Talbot interchange. The traffic analysis completed demonstrates the proposed Lind Avenue SW and Talbot Avenue S. interchange concept operates at an acceptable level for the year 2030 conditions. Compared to a 2030 "Do Nothing" option, there is significantly less delay and more vehicles served on the surrounding street network with the recommended option. Bypass ramps are not feasible because the "no bypass" options operate well and the bypass ramps would introduce additional impacts. Although the interchange configuration has been determined by the Task Force, City staff expressed some reservation with the interchange configuration at Lind. The distance between three of the Lind intersections in the vicinity of the proposed interchange, the two ramp termini and SW 16'' Street, is relatively short. This restricts the roadway channelization and limits the room available for vehicle queuing between traffic signal cycles. Because of this expressed reservation, a plan was developed to identify potential solutions if for some reason the intersections do not operate at an acceptable level. Identified means for improving interchange traffic operations, in the order they should be applied, are as follows: • Improve intersection layouts with additional lanes for turning and/or queuing • City street network improvements, i.e. extending Strander Blvd. to E. Valley Road will "pull" traffic away from Lind Avenue at 1-405 crossing • Reconstruct SW 1e and Lind/1e intersection to the south to create more queuing area between the northbound ramp intersections and the16"' Street intersection While these options are available, they are not expected to be needed. The traffic analysis indicates that the Lind interchange operates at an acceptable level with all intersections, as indicated by the control delay, operating at LOS �, =.hlogton State Dapartmant of Transportatlon 01 /19/2005 4 SAOMoadwayVeports0raff Recom Memo - Lind -Talbot Configura6on_v5.doc Congestion Relief & Bus Rapid Transit Projects 600 —108t' Avenue NE, Suite 405 Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425456-8500 Fax 425456-8600 C or better in 2030 peak conditions. This LOS is better than the LOS D/E, which is usually considered acceptable for intersection operations. Also, the analysis was performed using conservative input in many cases. For example, minimum green time for pedestrian movements was assumed on every cycle,100% queue was used while traditional engineering practice evaluates the 95" percentile queue. When a decision is made to fund this major transportation improvement to the 1-405/SR-167 interchange, traffic operations will be reviewed as part of the environmental process. At this time, one or more of the above operations improvements options may be implemented if determined to be needed at that time. In addition to the above, the following observations are also noted: The preliminary findings for routing the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) in the City of Renton vicinity, as developed through the 1-405 South Corridor BRT study, include a north -south crossing of 1-405 between Rainier Avenue (SR-167) and the western Renton city limits. This cross -route was originally anticipated to utilize Lind Avenue, but could easily be routed to Oakesdale Avenue to avoid any conflicts with Lind traffic if needed to avoid the traffic entering or exiting 1-405 at Lind. The City of Renton has agreements with the Washington State Department of Transportation which allows the City to operate the traffic signals at the ramp termini intersections. Once the project is funded, The City and WSDOT will develop agreements that will provide the City the authority to adjust the operations of the signal so they are coordinated with other City operated signalized intersections. ... Washington State �� Dopartmfnt of Transportation 01 /19/2005 S:1005boadwaylreports0raft Recom Memo - Und-Talbot Con(guabon_v5.doc .I' r i� 4;-34,2 s ! (B714.2) D-54.2 (D-49.9) C-27.3 - C-24.7 D-42 0 / B-17.2 .j . $ C 25 8 - - - _C. 21 6, __ ' / +y ,p" Talbot Interchange T p Option A-2 (S2:N1) �,, Los oFur Lit C 29.2 IC-24.8) o� 0-14.1 (C_303) DRAFT x.l 't CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL AI #: o Submitting Data: For Agenda of- Dept/Div/Board.. PBPW/Utility Systems February 14, 2005 Staff Contact...... Ron Straka, x7248 Agenda Status Allen Quynn, x7247 Consent .............. X Public Hearing.. Subject: Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Correspondence.. Bank Letter of Concurrence Ordinance ............. Resolution ............ Old Business........ New Business....... Exhibits: Issue paper Study Sessions...... Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Information......... Bank Letter of Concurrence Recommended Action: Approvals: Refer to Utilities Committee Legal Dept......... X Finance Dept...... Other ............... Fiscal Impact: None Expenditure Required... None Transfer/Amendment....... Amount Budgeted....... Revenue Generated......... Total Project Budget City Share Total Project.. SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Surface Water Utility, in coordination with the Parks Division and Transportation Division, is collaborating with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) to create the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank (Bank) on parcels of land owned by the City. The Bank would generate credits for both the City and WSDOT to use as mitigation for wetland impacts resulting from construction projects. A concurrence letter between the City and WSDOT has been prepared to clarify the commitments of both parties towards the development of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. The City and WSDOT will work together to gain approval from State and Federal regulatory agencies that determine the number of credits available in the Bank and approve the establishment of the Bank. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve creation of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank and authorize the Mayor to sign the Letter of Concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation. HAFile Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3170 Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Bank\1200 Agreements\concurrence agenda bill.doc\AQtp CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: February 3, 2005 TO: Terri Briere, Council President Members of the City Council VIA: Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor FROM: Gregg Zimmermd'rl, ministrator Planning/Building/Public Works Department STAFF CONTACT: Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor (ext. 7248) Allen Quynn, Surface Water Engineer (ext. 7247) SUBJECT: Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank Letter of Concurrence ISSUE: The Surface Water Utility, in coordination with the Parks Division and Transportation Division, is working with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) as part of their Early Environmental Investments program to jointly share in the creation of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank (Bank). The Bank would provide credits for both the City and WSDOT to use as mitigation for wetland impacts resulting from construction projects. A letter of concurrence has been prepared to clarify the commitments of both parties towards the creation of the Bank. RECOMMENDATION: Approve creation of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank and authorize the Mayor to sign the Letter of Concurrence with the Washington State Department of Transportation. BACKGROUND SUMMARY: Proposal: In the spring of 2003, WSDOT and the City began the process of identifying areas in the valley that could be used as mitigation for unavoidable wetland impacts resulting from proposed improvements to I-405. The City made a proposal to WSDOT to share in the development of two parcels of land the City owned that were reserved for a wetland mitigation bank as part of an agreement with the Glacier Park Company in 1992. The City would provide the land for the Bank and WSDOT would take the lead in developing the Bank. Both parties would then share in February 3, 2005 Page 2 the credits generated by the bank. Once WSDOT began the technical analysis to evaluate the feasibility of the proposal, it was determined that in order to provide some assurance that the resource agencies would approve the Bank, it would need to be expanded to include additional surrounding parcels that are also owned by the City. WSDOT has already secured funding for design through the nickel gas tax assessment. The Nickel Funding Package for I-405 will provide a portion of the financing for construction, operation, monitoring, and long-term management. The current proposal is to develop 130-acres of Renton owned property, located in the valley west of SR-167 and south of I-405, as a wetland and habitat mitigation bank. The Bank would consist of creating, restoring and enhancing wetlands, riparian corridors, upland habitat and wildlife habitat and corridors, which would result in improved water quality and flood storage. The Bank will also account for future City infrastructure needs, like roads and utilities. In addition, WSDOT will work with the City's Parks Division to incorporate the planned Springbrook Trail connection into the project, which would provide for recreational opportunities and include interpretive signs to promote wetlands preservation awareness and stewardship. At this time, the City and WSDOT are working with the Bank Oversight Committee (BOC), a group composed of representatives from the various resource agencies including the US Army Corps of Engineers, Washington State Department of Ecology, Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and others to determine how many credits the proposed Bank will generate. It is anticipated that the 130-acre site will provide 70 mitigation credits, enough to satisfy the requirements of both the City and WSDOT. The City and WSDOT propose to split the available credits on a fifty-fifty basis. In addition to determining the number of credits, WSDOT, the City and the BOC will continue to work on developing a draft Mitigation Bank Instrument (MBI). The MBI is an agreement between the WSDOT, the City and the BOC that defines the physical and legal characteristics of the bank including the goals and objectives, potential number of credits to be sold, performance standards, reporting and monitoring, maintenance, and the method of finance. Partnership Benefits: Both the City and WSDOT benefit by partnering to establish a wetland mitigation bank. By having WSDOT take the lead, the City benefits by being able to take advantage of WSDOT's experience in developing other banks throughout the State and their staff expertise. They have already established a working relationship with the Federal and State agencies that must review and approve the wetland mitigation bank and they have wetland technical experts on staff able to effectively and efficiently respond to questions or requests for technical information. These factors may result in the Bank being approved and available to use more quickly than if the City took the lead. WSDOT benefits by having access to studies completed by the Surface Water Utility for the Glacier Park Company wetland mitigation bank sites, and the hydrologic and hydraulic models previously developed to look at flood improvements to Springbrook Creek. This information will be extremely useful in designing and permitting the bank. HAFile Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3170 Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Bank\1200 Agreements\concurrence Issue paper.doc\RStp February 3, 2005 Page 3 Once constructed, the City and WSDOT would have credits available for projects that require wetland mitigation. WSDOT would be able to use half of the available credits to construct their Early Environmental Investments program for use in mitigating unavoidable wetland impacts associated with the I-405 Congestion Relief and Bus Rapid Transit Projects, SR-167 widening or other WSDOT projects within Renton. The City's credit share would be available to use for its own wetland mitigation that may be needed for City Capital Improvement Program (CIP) projects or Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) projects (Springbrook Creek Channel Improvement Project, Strander/SW 27th TIP, Springbrook Trail). The Wetland Mitigation Bank credits could also be sold to private property owners that are developing their property. The development community could be allowed to fill lower valued wetlands on their property in exchange for wetlands being created within our Wetland Mitigation Bank sites. This would allow development projects to build more improvements on their property, since they would not have to do wetland mitigation on -site. The increased level of development on the private property will increase assessed valuations for those private properties, which will increase the City's General Fund property tax revenues. Other City revenues may also be increased (employee tax, sales tax) depending upon the type of development. It is anticipated that there is sufficient need from City, WSDOT, and private property owners, to utilize all of the credits in the Wetland Mitigation Bank. If, after evaluating the Bank proposal, the BOC determines that the Bank will not yield the desired number of mitigation credits, the City and WSDOT will agree to work together on other alternatives to retain the investments already made. One option includes reducing the size of the Bank in order to minimize design and construction costs and still provide sufficient credits to make the Bank economically viable. Wetland Bank Parcels: The proposed Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank is comprised of 5 sites designated as Sites A, B, C, D and E. Each site is composed of parcels of land that have either been donated to or purchased by the City. Two of the parcels are reserved specifically for establishing a wetland mitigation bank. In 1992, the Glacier Park Company donated the parcels to the City for use in creating a wetland mitigation bank in exchange for the City granting the Glacier Park Company wetland fill permits for up to 4.11 acres of wetlands on six other parcels they wanted to sell. The Surface Water Utility, the Parks Division and the Transportation Division, on behalf of the City, purchased other Glacier Park Company parcels. In the 1970's, the Burlington Northern Company donated property to the City as mitigation for a grade and fill permit. The table below lists each parcel and provides a summary of the parcel size and how it was acquired: PARCEL ACQUIRED BY AREA ID (Acres) A Glacier Park Company donated property for the creation of a wetland 31.29 mitigation bank. HAFile Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3170 Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Bank\1200 Agreements\concurrence Issue paper.doc\RStp February 3, 2005 Page 4 B Glacier Park Company donated property for the creation of a wetland 13.99 mitigation bank. C1, C2, Surface Water Utility purchased property from the Glacier Park 33.80 C3 Company. Former P-1 Channel right-of-way. D Parks Division purchased property from the Glacier Park Company for 14.33 open space adjacent to proposed trail. E Surface Water Utility & Transportation Division purchased property 24.31 from the Glacier Park Company for future widening of SW 27ih Street and flood storage. F Burlington Northern Company donated property to the City of Renton 18.83 for wildlife and flood storage purposes. TOTAL 136.55 Please see the enclosed map for parcel locations. The City and WSDOT prepared the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank Prospectus, which has been provided to the BOC for review. The prospectus is a conceptual proposal used to help the BOC determine whether the proposed wetland mitigation bank is technically sound and will provide the desired mitigation credits. We have had two meetings with the BOC regarding the proposed Bank and the BOC members have reacted favorably to the proposal. WSDOT and the Surface Water Utility are currently working to provide additional technical information to the BOC including the amount of existing wetlands on the sites, a wetland functional assessment, topographic survey and site hydrology. The BOC has requested this information in order to determine the number of credits that could be available in the Bank. Our next meeting with the BOC is scheduled tentatively for February 16, 2005. CONCLUSION: The Surface Water Utility, in coordination with the Parks Division and Transportation Division, is working with the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) as part of their Early Environmental Investments program to jointly share in the creation of the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank. In order to continue to work collaboratively on this effort the Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends that the City Council authorize the Mayor to sign the Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank Letter of Concurrence. Enclosures cc: Lys Hornsby HAFile Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3170 Springbrook Creek Wedand and Habitat Bank\1200 Agreements\concurrence Issue paper.doc\RStp Congestion Relief S Bus Rapid Transit Projects Bellevue, WA 98004 Main 425-456-8500 Fax 425-456-8600 February 1, 2005 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Director City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Zimmerman: Re: Concurrence Letter Springbrook Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank Bank Credit Partnership The City of Renton (City) and Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) are currently working together to develop the Springbrook Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank (Bank). As we move forward in this process, I would like to clarify our commitments in this commitment letter. Full Vision The vision that the City and WSDOT have developed includes the development of 130 acres of Renton -owned property as a wetland and habitat mitigation bank. The concept for the proposed bank includes creation, restoration, and enhancement of wetland area, riparian corridors, upland habitat, and wildlife habitat and corridors. The proposed bank also accounts for future City infrastructure needs, like roads and utilities. WSDOT will work with the City of Renton Parks Division to incorporate a planned Springbrook Trail connection into the full vision concept. We recognize that trail improvements, while very desirable, may reduce wetland mitigation area and increase construction cost. We will need to carefully consider the trade-offs inherent in developing a trail versus maximizing wetland credits. The City and WSDOT are working with the Bank Oversight Committee (BOC) to determine the value of the Bank as measured in mitigation credits. The BOC has requested pre -design work on the site before making their credit determination. This work includes hydrologic analysis, ground survey, and environmental function analysis. WSDOT has started this work to move the Bank proposal forward in a fast -track manner. The proposed Bank provides opportunities for the City to mitigate for City and development projects and WSDOT to invest in mitigation for needed regional transportation projects. The City and WSDOT expect that the entire 130 acre site will provide at least 70 credits — adequate to meet both parties' needs. The City has determined that they require a minimum of 25 credits to make the Bank viable. WSDOT has determined that they require a minimum of 35 credits to make the Bank viable. The City and WSDOT propose to split the available mitigation credits on a fifty-fifty basis. + v Y 7ti�-"�' }FW 27th St �r ti+ i tx. th S �+ 55 t y SY+w`4st .Ss, SSW Alst 5t t� J t Fp { g1'. k �} „:,fit ✓r �:Vi �, SW 43c St, L 'W 4�C1 St \Jetland t�lti� `-'o� Bark Sites 0 600 1200 1 : 7200 arcel acres A 31.29. g 13.99 C1 18.65 C2 5.17 C3 9.98 p 14.33 E 24.31 F 18.83 TOTAL 136.55 BY C W X C i L COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE COMMITTEE REPORT Date February 14, 2005 PAVILION BUILDING LEASE Referred January 3, 2005 The Committee recommends moving forward with negotiations with the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train to utilize the Pavilion Building for an event center. Staff will work with the Dinner Train to bring a proposal back for consideration. Terri Briere, rty Council President cc: Alex Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT February 14, 2005 Mosier II Annexation Boundary Expansion (Referred January 24, 2005) sit Data a-0' "5- A Public Hearing on the Mosier II Annexation was held on February 7, 2005, after which Council authorized staff to invoke jurisdiction at the Boundary Review Board to request expansion of the annexation area to more reasonable boundaries. The Planning and Development Committee, therefore, recommends that the referral regarding the Mosier II Annexation Boundary Expansion be closed. Dan Clawson, Chair Denis W. Law, Vice Chair Marcie Palmer, ember cc: Alex Pietsch Rebecca Lind Don Erickson Ar'7"'%`117�,VE113 BY C 4'6' C,F�UNCIL Date o2 -/�/- a00s COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT February 14, 2005 Renton Municipal Parking Garage Artist Contract and Total Project Budget (Referred February 7, 2005) The Community Services Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to approve a contract with Richard C. Elliott, in the amount of $45,894.11, for his proposed work of art at the Renton Municipal Parking Garage, and a total project budget of $52,774.1 1. The Committee further recommends that the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the contract with Richard C. Elliott. Toni Nelson, Chair Marcie Palmer, Vice Chair Dan Clawson, Member cc: Peter Renner Dennis Culp *mtm a-R rk e FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT February 14, 2005 Data °?- APPROVAL OF CLAIMS AND PAYROLL VOUCHERS The Finance Committee approves for payment on February 14, 2005, claim vouchers 234347-234897 and 2 wire transfers, totaling $3,718,131.47 , and 572 direct deposits, payroll vouchers 55668- 55892, and 1 wire transfer, totaling $1,821,258.51 . Don Persson, Chair Tom Nelson, Vice -Char Denis Law, Member Date a-�y aoos FINANCE COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT February 14, 2005 New Fees for Utility Outstanding Balance Search and Special Water meter Read Service Referred February 7, 2005) The Finance Committee recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to implement service fees for special meter read, new utility account set up, and name change services. The Committee also recommends concurrence in the staff recommendation to implement special service fees for utility outstanding balance searches. The Committee further recommends that, the Ordinances regarding these matters be presented for first reading. Don Persson, Chair Toni Nelson, Vice Chai &4,1. Li. /A� Denis W. Law, Member cc: Linda Parks, Fiscal Services Director Brian Hilderman, Business System Analyst CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON "40P ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING SPECIAL SERVICE FEES FOR UTILITY OUTSTANDING BALANCE SEARCH. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: WHEREAS, the City provides utility outstanding balances to Title and Escrow companies at the close of property sales in Renton. WHEREAS, the cost of providing a utility outstanding balance search should be paid by those requesting the information, and not by all rate payers. WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that fees assessed in the amount of ten dollars ($ . aor an Internet water utility balance search; and thirty dollars ($S(F9�� water utility outstanding balance search requested by fax, messenger or letter are reasonable fees and these fees are based on the actual cost of providing these special services. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. Effective May 1, 2005, for each Internet water utility outstanding balance search, a fee will be assessed in the amount of ten dollars ($10.00). For each water utility outstanding balance search, requested by fax or letter, a fee will be assessed in the amount of thirty dollars ($30.00). H:\FINANCE\ADMINSUP\03—Ordinances—Resolutions\Ordinance re City UB Search Fees_2005-doc CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADDING SECTION 5-1-2.K TO 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" TO ADOPT SERVICE FEES FOR SPECIAL METER READINGS, NEW UTILITY ACCOUNT SETUP, AND UTILITY ACCOUNT TRANSFERS. WHEREAS, the City provides special request water meter readings to title and escrow companies at the close of property sales in Renton, and the City processes new utility billing accounts and transfers accounts; and WHEREAS, the cost of creating new utility billing accounts and transferring accounts should be paid by those requesting the information, and not by all rate payers; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that fees assessed in the following amounts are reasonable fees, and these fees are based on the actual cost of providing these special services: Thirty dollars ($30.00) for a special request water meter reading; twenty-five dollars ($25.00) for a utility new account setup; and five dollars ($5.00) for a utility billing account transfer, NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L A new Section, 5-1-2.K, 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 added, to read as follows: K. Utility Fees: Special Request Water Meter Reading $30.00 1 ORDINANCE NO. Utility New Account Setup $25.00 Utility Billing Account Transfer $5.00 SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication, and the new fees will be charged beginning May 1, 2005_ PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of 112005. Bonnie 1. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 1163:2/7/05:ma Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor 2005. N CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 5-1-2.K TO 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" TO ADOPT SERVICE FEES FOR UTILITY OUTSTANDING BALANCE SEARCHES. WHEREAS, the City provides utility outstanding balances to title and escrow companies at the close of property sales in Renton; and WHEREAS, the cost of providing a water utility outstanding balance search should be paid by those requesting the information, and not by all rate payers; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that fees assessed in the following amounts are reasonable fees, and these fees are based on the actual cost of providing these special services: ten dollars ($10.00) for an internet water utility balance search and thirty dollars ($30.00) for a water utility outstanding balance search requested by fax, messenger or letter; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION L Section 5-1-2.K, 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, to read as follows: K. Utility Fees: Special Request Water Meter Reading $30.00 Utility New Account Setup $25.00 Utility Billing Account Transfer $5.00 1 ORDINANCE NO. Internet Water Utility Balance Search $10.00 Water Utility Outstanding Balance Search Requested By Fax, Messenger or Letter $30.00 SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and 30 days after publication, and the new fees will be charged beginning May 1, 2005. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this day of , 2005. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this day of .2005. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD. 1166:2/7/05:ma 2 Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor