The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREGULAR COUNCIL - 01 Jun 2015 - Agenda - Pdf AGENDA RENTON CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING June 1, 2015 Monday, 7 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 first comment period is limited to one-half hour. The second 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 city of residence for the record, SPELLING YOUR LAST NAME. NOTICE to all participants: pursuant to state law, RCW 42.17A.555, campaigning for any ballot measure or candidate in City Hall and/or during any portion of the council meeting, including the audience comment portion of the meeting, is PROHIBITED. 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 the Council meeting minutes of 5/18/2015. Council concur. b. City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Sanitary Sewer Extension project; and submits staff recommendation to accept the lowest responsive bid submitted by Scotty’s General Construction in the amount of $127,504.12. Council concur. c. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to adopt the annual updates to the 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. Refer to the Transportation (Aviation) Committee; set public hearing on June 15, 2015. d. Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment to the Boeing Company Lease Agreement (LAG-10-001) to extend the Airport’s use of the 760 and 770 parcels for tenant tie downs until August 31, 2015. Council concur. e. Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract CAG-13-194, with APS Surveying and Mapping, to increase the amount by $305,000 and extend the schedule until August 31, 2016 for the Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project. Council concur. 6.UNFINISHED BUSINESS Topics listed below were discussed in Council committees during the past week. Those topics Page 1 of 247 marked with an asterisk (*) may include legislation. Committee reports on any topics may be held by the Chair if further review is necessary. a. Finance Committee: Vouchers, Coulon Park Concrete Tile Rehabilitation Project 7.RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Ordinance for second and final reading: a. Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015) 8.NEW BUSINESS (Includes Council Committee agenda topics; visit rentonwa.gov/cityclerk for more information.) 9.AUDIENCE COMMENTS 10.EXECUTIVE SESSION Potential Property Acquisition per RCW 42.30.110(1)(b). Approx. 20 Minutes. 11.ADJOURNMENT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA (Preceding Council Meeting) COUNCIL CHAMBERS June 1, 2015 Monday, 6:00 p.m. King County Solid Waste Transfer Plan - Renton Impacts • 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 To view Council Meetings online please visit rentonwa.gov/councilmeetings Page 2 of 247 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Contract Award for Bid Opening on 5/12/2015; CAG-15-099; SE 165th St. Sanitary Sewer Extension Meeting: REGULAR COUNCIL - 01 Jun 2015 Exhibits: A. Staff Recommendation B. Bid Tab Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: City Clerk Staff Contact: Jason Seth, City Clerk, ext. 6502 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ 127,504.12 Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ 150,000 City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: Engineers Estimate: $142,026.98 In accordance with Council procedure, bids submitted at the subject bid opening met the following three criteria: l There was more than one bid. l The low bid was within the project budget. l There were no irregularities with the lowest responsive bid. The apparent low bid submitted by Rhino Construction was withdrawn. Therefore, staff recommends acceptance of the lowest responsive bid by Scotty's General Construction, in the amount of $127,504.12 for the SE 165th St. Sanitary Sewer Extension project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Accept the lowest responsive bid submitted by Scotty's General Construction, in the amount of $127,504.12 for the SE 165th St. Sanitary Sewer Extension project. 5b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 3 of 247 PUBLICWORKSDEPARTMENTMEMORANDUMDATE:May19,2015CITYOFRENTONTO:JasonSeth,CityClerkMAY132915FROM:MichaelBenoit,WastewaterUtility,x7206wRECEIVEDSUBJECT:BidAwardforCAG-15-099CITYCLERKSOFFICESE165thStreetSanitarySewerExtensionThePublicWorksDepartmenthasreviewedthebidsthatweresubmittedfortheSE165thStreetSanitarySewerExtensionprojectandwerecommendthatthebidbeawardedtoScotty’sGeneralConstruction.WearerequestingthatanagendabillforCouncilConcurbepreparedfortheJune1,2015,CouncilMeeting.ThebidopeningwasonTuesday,May12,2015.Therewereeightbidsreceived.ThelowbidderwasRinoConstructionwithabidof$73,738.TheCityhasbeencontactedbyRino.Theyhaveidentifiedmajorerrorsintheirbidandhaveaskedtowithdrawthebid.UnderWSDOTStandardSpecifications1-03.1,Rentonhasconcurredinthe“claimoferror”andhasdeterminedthattheBiddershouldberelievedofresponsibility.AsRentonhasconcurredintheir“claimoferror”,theirbidbondwillbereturnedtothem.ThesecondlowbidderwasScotty’sGeneralConstructionwithabidof$127,504.12.Theengineer’sestimatewas$142,026.98.TherewerenoerrorsofsignificanceonanyofthebidsotherthanRinoConstruction’s.TheprojectbudgetamountfortheSE165thStreetSanitarySewerExtensionproject(426.465509)is$150,000.ThelowbidfortheSE165thStreetSanitarySewerExtensionprojectiswithintheamountapprovedinthe2015budgetforthisproject.Theprojectwillextendthesanitarysewermainapproximately325feetinSE165thtoprovideservicetothesingle-familyhomesinthisblock.AttachedforyourreferenceisRinoConstruction’srequestforreliefformthebid.Ifyouhaveanyquestions,pleasecontactmeat425-430-7206orbyemailatmbenoit@rentonwa.gov.Attachmentcc:GreggZimmerman,PWAdministratorLysHornsby,UtilitySystemsDirectorDaveChristensen,WastewaterUtilitySupervisorH:\FileSys\WWP-WasteWater\WWP-27-03804SE165thSewerExtension\Award-Clerk-SE165thSewer.doc/MABtp-...|-I-—rpu.=.|:-.|-I. 1.'E'-3" 5 I- |_ I'_' I I I3..-II"-3:.-'-.I _I '" II I I I I II I IIIII:I --II :I- I:.- I IIIIIIII I|:- :I III.II I I I I I I IIIII I.-.;-' '--::--'1 I IIII:III -IIIII'''.'.:|W ucw...nEoaa.umu>.~.:<.mzqn35.@.%@@._. .<_m_<_ox>zcc.<_ _u>.:w_<_m<Hm.No.5 .5.._mmo:mmE.Q5.n_m1A $02.._<:n:mm_wmzoz.Em?mémamwC:__~<..38 mcemn...En.><<m..n3..n>m-Hm-8m mmBu...m.2.mm»mm:=m«<mm<<m_.mx..m:m_o: Em2...;<<o_._GUm_um.E._m3Emm«m<.m<<mn_Em9%E3<<m?m.£c3.n2_.noqEm mmam...233$3.33.$22mx?mznoz_u3..mQmagEm«mno33m=aEmaEmca cm m<<m&mn_.8mno$<.mmm:m$_nozm?cnzoa.<<mm..m?mncmmzzm:..m..m:mmmsamE:..o.. noc:n__nozncacmuwmumnma+0.,EmEsmH.N89955.._<_mm::m.Em.0...oum:.:mEma o:23%...<_m<HM.Nopm.Emqm<<m_,mm.m32%..mnm_<ma. Em_o<<En_n_mqEmmE30no:m.Q:n:o:SEmU...o.“mduwm.EmQ3.Emmcmm: noimnnma3.2:0.Em<Em<m...m3...m..33.9mloqm.3Em....0...man.:m<m3.3..8 <<En_B<<Emca.c_..n_m_.<<mUO.aM333...mumninmsosmvow»..633:Emmnoanc?ma 3Em..n_m.3o.“9.31.magEmmn_m.nm..3:.maEm»Em.w..__..226:...cm21.9.2.o? «mm_uo:m_c._:<.>m298:Emanosnclmg_...Em:..n_m_3owmloq...Em:En..82.<5:cm 383mg8Em3. Emmmnozq_o<<_..a_..2<<mmm83.....mm:m8_noswacnzosSEm.0...o..mH~..mo...S. .Emm:m_:mm....n.mm:3m.mm.23.£..~.o~m.mm.Emam<<mqmsom:,oGo.“m?zinmsnmo...32 o." EmcamoEm«Em:E30no:m.Q:n:o:.m. Em_u_.o..mnHgammam3o::1oqEmmmSm...m?mm?mm..._.B..<mmémam§m:m_o:_3o..mQ ...~m.._.mm.n.om..m?moboo.Em_o<<En...o«EmmmSm...mzmamm::mJ.mmémq mx.nm:m.o: _u3..mR_m<<_E_:Emm3o::.n9.835..SEmN85.2252..o«3...._o3..mn¢ .Emu3_.mQ..<___9.32.Em$2.82mmémq33:mu_u3x_3mHm_<Sm..mm.a.:mmEu....8 _u_.o<ammmqsnm.8Emm.:m_m-..m3._<:o3mm.3EHEonw. >.:mn:mn_3.<05..m..m«m:nm.mEgono:.£..cn:o:.m?mncm?3..«m_.m++03.Em 2..._.. <0: Em<mm:<ncmmzozm.Emmmm8:333m2..~.n.-.mo-.~omow3.m3m__3 Scmzo..._.m:3...<<m.o<. >nmn_.3m..: onmqmmmN...:..:m3..m_...32>q3._...m.:m.8_, EmIo3...c<.S.._.2m<&m3mo._.mn.8_. _um<mQ:....3am_..<<mmnm<<m?m_.c2_:<m:um2_mo1 In/Emm<m/<<<<_u-<<mm.8s\m~m},>\S:u-~.\.-owmo»mmEm;mmémqmx§..._o=/><§.__-n_2_&mSun.mm<<m_..aon O_.a<ommmzaoz §><wwNew mmom_<m_u O_._.<ormmxw5b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 4 of 247 MichaelABenoitFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Attachments:Michael,JaramyHotchkiss<jaramyh@rinocon.com>Tuesday,May12,20157:39PMMichaelABenoitSE165thStreetSanitarySewerExtensionBidCORenton-165thbidsheet.pdfIhavespentthelasthourgoingbackoverthis,Ididfindtwoerror’ssowewillhavetoclaimerroronthisoneandletitgo.Ournumbershouldhavebeenaroundthe121-122kmarkandIsatdownwiththeownertoseeifwecouldhonorthepriceanditjustisn’tfeasiblebecausesomeonereadthewrongnumbersoff.AttachedisareportIjustrantoconfirmanditappearsthatthenumberswereeitherwrittenbackwardsorcompletelymissread.Iapologizefortheinconvenienceandwelookforwardtothenextopportunity.JaramyHotchkissSeniorEstimator&ProjectManagerRinoConstructionEarthwork&UtilityConstruction360-469-4941Office425-728-8449Fax206-379-0187Cellbids@rinocon.com“Toughprojectscompletedbyastrongindustryleader”15b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 5 of 247 05/12/2015 18:29 JH20151 19 SE 165TH STREET SEWER EXTENSION ***BID TOTALS Biditem Description -Status -Rnd Quantity Units Unit Price Bid Total MOBILIZATION &DEMOBILIZATION U 1.000 LS 9,500.00 9,500.00 2 TRENCH EXCAVATION SAFETY SYSTEMS U 1.000 LS 1,000.00 1,000.00 3 CONSTRUCTION SURVEY,STAKING,ASBUILTS U 1.000 LS 2,000.00 2,000.00 4 TRAFFIC CONTROL U 1.000 LS 1,500.00 1,500.00 5 TEMP EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL U 1.000 LS 1,000.00 1,000.00 6 LANDSCAPE RESTORATION U 1.000 LS 1,500.00 1,500.00 7 F&I 8 PVC SEWER PIPE U 325.000 LF 83.00 26,975.00 $f&I 6 PVC SIDE SEWER PIPE U 266.000 LF 53.00 14,098.00 9 TV INSPECTION U 325.000 LF 3.00 975.00 10 F&I 48’DIAM SSMH #1 U 1.000 EA 8,000.00 8,000.00 11 F&1 4$”DIAM SSMH #2 U 1.000 EA 5,200.00 5,200.00 12 REMOVAL &REPLACEMENT OF UNSUITABLE FOUNDATION U 50.000 TON 53.00 2,650.00 13 SELECT IMPORT TRENCH BACKFILL U 628.000 TON 42.00 26,376.00 14 ASPHALT TRENCH PATCH INCL.CSTC U 392.000 SY 27.00 10,584.00 Bid Total $111,358.005b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 6 of 247 05.13.2015_______________________________ToRE:SE165THSTREETSANITARYSEWEREXTENSIONBIDERRORMichaelBenoitCityofRenton1055SouthGradyWayRenton,WA.98055DearMr.Beniot,RinoConstructionisrequestingpetWSDOTSpecification1-03.1Considerationofbids,thatwebereliefedofresponsibilitiesp1awardonthebasisofbiderror.ERROR#1;asdomanybidders,weusedarunnerwhomisrelayedthefinalbidpricesoverthephoneatthelocationofbid.Thereappearstohavebeensomecommunicationbreakdownandseveralofourunitpriceswereincorrectlywrittendown.Resultinginatotalcontractpriceneatly55,000.00lessthanthecompetitors.Thiserrorwasnotamaliciousonebuturookiemistake”ifyouwill.ERROR#2;wasmoreofairregularityinthebid,weattachedastatementofqualifications,howeverthereferencesheetswereleftoutofthepackage.Dotobotherror’swerespectfullyaskthecitytorejectoutproposalandawardthisprojecttothenextbidder.Warmregards,myHotchkisGeneralManagerbids@rinocon.comRINOCONSTRUCTIONTel360-469-4941P0BOX667WWW.R1NOCON.COMFax425-728-8449MAPLEVALLEY,WA.98038BIDS@RIN0CON.COM5b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 7 of 247 Project: SE 165th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension CAG‐15‐099 Date: 05/12/15 CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET 1 of 2 Bid Total from Prop & L&I Bid Schedule Schedule of Prices trppl form Cert. Bond of Prices *Includes Sales Tax J Lynn Environmental, LLC P.O. Box 727 1 Black Diamond x x x x $168,095.52 WA 98010 Josh Langdon King Construction 982 Thornton Pl. SW 2 Pacific x x x x $147,401.24 WA 98047‐2115 Brad Holt Northwest Cascade, Inc. P.O. Box 73399 3 Puyallup x x x x $141,261.57 WA 98373 Clintone Myers R.L. Alia Company 107 Williams Ave. S 4 Renton x x x x $166,192.53 WA 98057 Richard L. Alia Bidder FORMS Engineer's Estimate $142,026.985b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 8 of 247 Project: SE 165th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension CAG‐15‐099 Date: 05/12/15 CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET 2 of 2 Bid Total from Prop & L&I Bid Schedule Schedule of Prices trppl form Cert. Bond of Prices *Includes Sales Tax Bidder FORMS Rino Construction P.O. Box 667 5 Maple Valley x x x x $73,409.90 WA 98038 WITHDRAWN Jaramy as per WSDOT Standard Hotchkiss Specification 1‐03.1 Scotty's General Construction, Inc. 20405 SE 344th St. 6 Auburn x x x x $127,504.12 WA 98092 Rodger C. Scott Shoreline Construction Co. P.O. Box 358 Woodenville x x x x $131,649.66 7 WA 98072 Douglas J. Suzuki Westwater Construction Company P.O. Box 59237 Renton x x x x $177,658.28 8 WA 98058 Michael J. Caplis Engineer's Estimate $142,026.985b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 9 of 247 Project: SE 165th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension CAG‐15‐099 Date: 05/12/15 CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET 3 of 2 Engineer's Estimate $142,026.985b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 10 of 247 Project: SE 165th Street Sanitary Sewer Extension CAG‐15‐099 Date: 05/12/15 CITY OF RENTON BID TABULATION SHEET 4 of 2 Engineer's Estimate $142,026.985b. - City Clerk reports bid opening on 5/12/2015 for CAG-15-099 – SE 165th St. Page 11 of 247 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan Update Meeting: REGULAR COUNCIL - 01 Jun 2015 Exhibits: A. Issue Paper B. Draft 2016-2021 Six-Year TIP C. Draft Resolution Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Transportation Systems Division Staff Contact: Juliana Fries, Program Dev. Coordinator x7232 Recommended Action: Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The City is required, by law, to annually review the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) and adopt the update by Resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve resolution to adopt the annual updates to the 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan; set public hearing on June 15, 2015. 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 12 of 247 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:June 1, 2015 TO:Ed Prince, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA:Denis Law, Mayor FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator STAFF CONTACT:Doug Jacobson, Deputy Public Works Administrator, Transportation (ext. 7242) SUBJECT:2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan Update ISSUE: Should Council approve the annual updates to the 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP), set June 15, 2015 as the public hearing for the 2016-2021 TIP and present the Resolution for reading and adoption? RECOMMENDATION: 1.Approve the annual updates to the 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. 2.Set June 15, 2015 as the public hearing for the 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. 3.Present the Resolution for reading and adoption. BACKGROUND: The City is required by law to annually review the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan and adopt the update by resolution. We are proposing one new project in the 2016-2021 Six-Year TIP: Rainier Avenue North Corridor Improvements – Phase 5, TIP #39: This project will extend the improvements from NW 3rd Street to the north city limits. The project is unfunded at this time. The draft TIP is presented to the Council and referred to the Transportation (Aviation) Committee for review in advance of the public hearing. In addition to the projected 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 13 of 247 Ed Prince, Council President Members of the Renton City Council Page 2 of 2 June 1, 2015 revenues and expenditures for the future six years, the TIP also includes current-year project allocations and past project expenditures. All projects in the TIP are presented to Council for review and approval collectively during the budget process and again individually when approval is requested for design and construction contracts. cc:Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer Doug Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator – Transportation Jim Seitz, Transportation Planning and Programming Manager Juliana Fries, Program Development Coordinator Joey Harnden, Transportation Administrative Secretary I 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 14 of 247 City of Renton Washington 2016-2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Highlands to Landing Pedestrian Connection Project Mayor Denis Law Hearing: June .. , 2015 Gregg Zimmerman Adopted: June .. , 2015 Public Works Administrator Resolution: xxxx RENTON. AHEAD OF TH E cUR'JE. R~eityof entonG Public Works De artinent City of Renton Washington 2016 —2021 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program Mayor Denis Law Hearing:June ..,2015 Gregg Zimmerman Adopted:June ..,2015 Public Works Administrator Resolution:xxxx e ton I5ut‘>~1io_'Wo1;ksDe‘5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 15 of 247 SECTION ONE PURPOSE OF SIX-YEAR TIP PROGRAM • Purpose of Six-Year TIP • Vision Statement • Mission Statement • City Business Plan 1-1 1-2 1-2 1-2 SECTION ONE PURPOSE OF SIX-YEAR TIP PROGRAM Purpose of Six—YearTIP 1-1 Vision Statement 1-2 Mission Statement 1-2 City Business Plan 1-2 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 16 of 247 CITY OF RENTON SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2016-2021 PURPOSE • Reflects involvement by citizens and elected officials. • Implements the City of Renton Mission Statement. • Used to coordinate transportation projects and programs with other jurisdictions and agencies. • Multi-year planning tool for the development of the transportation facilities within the City. • Required for State and Federal funding programs. • Vital part of planning under the Growth Management Act. • Mandated by State Law. 1-1 CITY OF RENTON SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 2016-2021 PURPOSE Re?ects involvement by citizens and elected officials. Implements the City of Renton Mission Statement. Used to coordinate transportation projects and programs with other jurisdictions and agencies. Multi-year planning tool for the development of the transportation facilities within the City. Required for State and Federal funding programs. Vital part of planning under the Growth Management Act. Mandated by State Law. 1-15c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 17 of 247 Provide a safe, Promote economic Support planned Building an inclusive Meet service demands healthy, vibrant vitality and strategically growth and influence informed city with and provide high community position Renton for decisions that impact opportunities for all quality customer • Promote safety, health, the future the city • Improve access to city service and security through • Promote Renton as the • Foster development services and programs Plan, develop, and effective communication progressive, opportunity· of vibrant, sustainable, and make residents maintain quality services, and service delivery rich city in the Puget attractive, mixed-use and businesses aware infrastructure, and • Facilitate successful Sound region neighborhoods in urban of opportunities to amenities neighborhoods through • Capitalize on centers be involved with their • Prioritize services community involvement opportunities through • Uphold a high standard community at levels that can be • Encourage and partner bold and creative of design and property • Build connections with sustained by revenue in the development of economic development maintenance ALL communities that • Retain a skilled quality housing choices strategies • Advocate Renton's reflect the breadth and workforce by making richness of the diversity for people of all ages and • Recruit and retain interests through state and in our city Renton the municipal income levels businesses to ensure federal lobbying efforts, employer of choice • Promote a walkable, a dynamic, diversified regional partnerships and • Promote understanding • Develop and maintain pedestrian and bicycle-employment base other organizations and appreciation of collaborative partnerships our diversity through friendly city with complete • Nurture • Pursue transportation celebrations and festivals and investment strategies streets, trails, and entrepreneurship and other regional that improve services connections between and foster successful improvements and • Provide critical and • Respond to growing neighborhoods and partnerships with services that improve relevant information on a service demands community focal points businesses and quality of life timely basis and facilitate through partnerships, • Provide opportunities community leaders • Balance development two-way dialogue innovation, and outcome between city government for communities to be • Leverage public/ with environmental and the community management better prepared for private resources to focus protection emergencies development on economic • Encourage centers volunteerism, participation fi and civic engagement e RENTON. AHEAD OF THE CURVE. Renton Business Plan MISSION The City of Renton,in partnership and communication with residents,businesses,and schools,is dedicated to: VISION Renton:The center of opportunity in the Puget Sound Region where families and businesses thrive Providea safe, healthy,vibrant community I Promote safety,health, and security through effective communication and service delivery I Facilitatesuccessful neighborhoods through community involvement I Encourage and partner inthe development of qualityhousingchoices for people of allages and income levels I Promote a walkable, pedestrian and bicycle- friendlycity withcomplete streets,trails,and connections between neighborhoods and community focal points I Provideopportunities forcommunities to be better prepared for emergencies I Providing a safe,healthy,welcoming atmosphere where people choose to live I Promoting economic vitality and strategically positioning Renton for the future I Supporting planned growth and in?uencing decisions that impact the city I Building an inclusive informed city with opportunities for all I Meeting service demands through high quality customer service,innovation, a positive work environment,and a commitment to excellence 2o16—2o21gogoALs Promoteeconomic vitalityand strategically position Rentonfor the future I Promote Renton as the progressive,opportunity- richcity in the Puget Sound region I Capitalizeon opportunities through boldand creative economic development strategies I Recruitand retain businessesto ensure a dynamic,diversi?ed employment base I Nurture entrepreneurship and foster successful partnershipswith businessesand community leaders I Leverage public/ private resources to focus development on economic centers Support planned growth and in?uence decisionsthat impact the city I Foster development of vibrant,sustainable, attractive,mixed—use neighborhoods in urban centers I Upholda high standard of design and property maintenance I AdvocateRenton's interests through state and federal lobbyingefforts, regionalpartnerships and other organizations I Pursue transportation and other regional improvements and services that improve qualityof life I Balancedevelopment with environmental protection Buildingan inclusive informed citywith opportunities for all I Improveaccess to city services and programs and makeresidents and businesses aware ofopportunities to be involvedwith their community I Buildconnections with ALLcommunities that re?ect the breadth and richnessofthe diversity inour city I Promote understanding and appreciation of our diversity through celebrationsand festivals I Providecriticaland relevant informationon a timely basisand facilitate two-way dialogue between city government and the community I Encourage volunteerism,participation and civicengagement Meet servicedemands and providehigh quality customer service I Plan,develop,and maintain qualityservices, infrastructure,and amenities I Prioritizeservices at levelsthat can be sustained byrevenue I Retain a skilled workforceby making Renton the municipal employerofchoice I Developand maintain collaborativepartnerships and investment strategies that improve services I Respondto growing service demands through partnerships, innovation,and outcome management RENTON.AHEAD OF THE CURVE.5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 18 of 247 SECTION TWO SIX-YEAR TIP MAP • TIP Map, Exhibit A • Map Index, Exhibit B 2-1 2-2 SECTION TWO SIX-YEAR TIP MAP 0 TIP Map,Exhibit A 0 Map Index,Exhibit B 2-1 2-2 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 19 of 247 City of Renton-2016-2021 TIP ,_7 - .€:Lpg. 4 I K; "we;-g......A..‘...,‘;‘\)2 '5?‘ City of Renton -2016-2021 TIP I lnnlntaal I II ‘/1111 E 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 20 of 247 EXHIBIT 'B' City of Renton 2016 -2021 Amended Transportation Improvement Program Map Index TIP No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Project Title Street Overlay Program Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 2ih St/Strander Blvd Connection NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor Duvall Ave NE-NE ih to Sunset Blvd NE Rainier AveS Phase 4-S 3rd Street to NW 3rd Place Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project Park Ave North Extension 116th Ave SE/Edmonds Ave SE Improvements Carr Road Improvements NE Sunset Blvd (SR 900) Corridor Improvements Sunset Area Green Connections Oakesdale Ave SW /Monster Road SW /68th Ave S South ih Street -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Road S S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS Houser Way N-N gth St to SLake Washington Blvd Lake Washington Loop Trail Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail Walkway Program Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacement Maple Valley Highway -Half Bridge Attenuator Bridge Inspection and Repair Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Intersection Safety and Mobility Traffic Safety Program Preservation of Traffic Operation Devices Program Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Program Barrier Free Transition Plan Implementation Project Development!Predesign Arterial Circulation Program 1% for the Arts Program Lake Washington Boulevard -Park A venue N to Coulon Park Lind Avenue -SW 16th to SW 43rd Sunset Lane/NE lOth St Roadway Improvements NE 31st St Bridge Replacement N 2ih Pl Culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 5 2-2 EXHIBIT ‘B’ City of Renton 2016 —2021 Amended Transportation Improvement Program Map Index TIP No.Project Title 1 Street Overlay Program 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 4 SW 27”‘St/Strander Blvd Connection 5 NE 3'“/NE4”‘Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE —NE 7"‘to Sunset Blvd NE 7 Rainier Ave s Phase 4 -s 3rd Street to NW 3'“Place 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 9 Park Ave North Extension 10 116"‘Ave SE/Edmonds Ave SE Improvements 11 Carr Road Improvements 12 NE Sunset Blvd (SR 900)Corridor Improvements 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Road SW/68"‘Ave s 15 South 7"‘Street ~Rainier Ave s to Talbot Road s 16 S Grady Way —Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 17 Houser Way N —N 8"‘St to S Lake Washington Blvd 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 19 Lake to Sound (L2S)Trail 20 Walkway Program 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacement 22 Maple Valley Highway —Half Bridge Attenuator 23 Bridge Inspection and Repair 24 Roadway Safety andGuardrail Program 25 Intersection Safety and Mobility 26 Traffic Safety Program 27 Preservation of Traffic Operation Devices Program 28 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)Program 29 Barrier Free Transition Plan Implementation 30 Project Development/Predesign 31 Arterial Circulation Program 32 1%for the Arts Program 33 Lake Washington Boulevard —Park Avenue N to Coulon Park 34 Lind Avenue —sw 16"‘to sw 43'“ 35 Sunset Lane/NE 10”‘St Roadway Improvements 36 NE 315‘St Bridge Replacement 37 N 27"‘Pl Culvert Scour Repair 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements —Phase 5 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 21 of 247 SECTION THREE DEVELOPMENT & PRIORITIZATION OF THE SIX-YEAR TIP • General Programming Criteria 3-1 • Specific TIP Development Activities 3-3 • Summary Table of Projects and Programs: 3-5 SECTION THREE DEVELOPMENT &PRIORITIZATION OF THE SIX-YEAR TIP 0 General Programming Criteria 3-1 0 Speci?c TIP Development Activities 3-3 0 Summary Table of Projects and Programs:3-5 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 22 of 247 DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION OF THE SIX-YEAR TIP I. General Programming Criteria The yearly update of the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is part of an ongoing process intrinsically linked with the development of the City's Capital Improvement Program. The Six-Year TIP is also linked with various state and federal funding programs, regional/inter-jurisdictional planning and coordination processes and the City's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Projects are developed and prioritized based on community needs, specific goals to be achieved and on general programming considerations. Those general programming considerations are: Priority. As shown on page 3-5 the projects and programs are prioritized by type by City staff with final approval by the City Council during the annual update of the TIP. The prioritization assists staff in assigning the limited resources to projects and programs and reducing resources during funding shortfalls. In general staff expends more resources on higher priority projects in the first three years of the TIP, and when applying for grants staff will consider these projects first unless other lower priority projects better meet the particular criteria of a grant program. Planning. How, at a local and regional level, a project fits with, or addresses identified future transportation goals, demands and planning processes must be evaluated. This is strongly influenced by ongoing land use decisions and by regional highway and transit system plans. Financing. Many projects are dependent on outside grants, formation of LID's or the receipt of impact fees. Prioritization has to take into account the peculiarities of each of the various fund sources and the probabilities of when, and how much, money will be available. Scheduling. If a project is interconnected with, or interdependent on, other projects taking place, this is reflected in their relative priorities. Past Commitment. The level of previous commitment made by the City in terms of resources, legislative actions or inter-local agreements also must be taken into consideration in prioritizing TIP projects. In addition to the general considerations discussed above, there are five specific project categories through which the TIP is evaluated and analyzed. They are: • Maintenance and Preservation of Existing Infrastructure • Corridor Projects • Operations and Safety • Non-Motorized Projects 3-l DEVELOPMENT AND PRIORITIZATION OF THE SD(-YEAR TIP 1.General Programming Criteria The yearly update of the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)is part of an ongoing process intrinsically linked with the development of the City’s Capital Improvement Program.The Six-Year TIP is also linked with various state and federal funding programs,regional/inter-jurisdictional planning and coordination processes and the City’s Growth Management Act Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Projects are developed and prioritized based on community needs,specific goals to be achieved and on general programming considerations.Those general programming considerations are: Priority.As shown on page 3-5 the projects and programs are prioritizedby type by City staff with final approval by the City Council during the annual update of the TIP.The prioritization assists staff in assigning the limited resources to projects and programs and reducing resources during funding shortfalls.In general staff expends more resources on higher priority projects in the first three years of the TIP,and when applying for grants staff will consider these projects first unless other lower priority projects better meet the particular criteria of a grant program. Planning.How,at a local and regional level,a project fits with,or addresses identified future transportation goals,demands and planning processes must be evaluated.This is strongly influenced by ongoing land use decisions and by regional highway and transit system plans. Financing.Many projects are dependent on outside grants,formation of LlD’s or the receipt of impact fees.Prioritization has to take into account the peculiarities of each of the various fund sources and the probabilities of when,and how much,money will be available. Scheduling.If a project is interconnected with,or interdependent on,other projects taking place,this is reflected in their relative priorities. Past Commitment.The level of previous commitment made by the City in terms of resources,legislative actions or inter-local agreements also must be taken into consideration in prioritizing TIP projects. In addition to the general considerations discussed above,there are five specific project categories through which the TIP is evaluated and analyzed.They are: Maintenance and Preservation of Existing Infrastructure Corridor Projects Operations and Safety Non-Motorized Projects 3-] 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 23 of 247 • Others These categories provide a useful analysis tool and represent goals developed through an evaluation of the City's transportation program in response to input from citizens and local officials and to State and Federal legislation. Taken as a whole, the five categories provide a framework for evaluating projects both individually and as part of a strategy that seeks to meet and balance the transportation needs of Renton during a time of increasing transportation demand, decreasing revenues, and growing environmental concerns. Although each project can be identified with an important concern that allows it to be classified into one of the five categories, most projects are intended to address, and are developed to be compatible with, multiple goals. Maintenance and Preservation of the Existing Infrastructure is a basic need that must be met by the program. The Mayor and City Council have emphasized the importance of sustaining strong programs in this project category and maintaining our current infrastructure. Therefore more than half of the Transportation's City Funds have historically been allocated under this category. The State Growth Management Act also requires jurisdictions to assess and address the funding required to maintain their existing transportation systems. The City of Renton owns and maintains 250 centerline miles of streets. Corridor Projects are oriented toward "moving people" through a balanced transportation system that involves multiple modes of transportation. Included are facilities that facilitate the movement of transit and carpools. The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 2151 Century Act (MAP-21 ), the State and Federal Clean Air legislation, and the State Commute Trip Reduction Act (CTR) have added momentum to regional efforts and placed requirements on local jurisdictions such as Renton to promote these transportation elements. Operations and Safety projects and programs are developed through ongoing analyses of the transportation system and are directed mainly toward traffic engineering concerns such as safety and congestion. Projects are identified not only by analysis of traffic counts, accident records and geometric data, but also through review and investigation of citizen complaints and requests. Non-Motorized Projects have been developed with major emphasis on addressing community quality of life issues by improving and/or protecting residential livability while providing necessary transportation system improvements. Bicycle and pedestrian projects are included in this category. Other Programs involve planning of transportation improvements necessitated by new development and new transportation capital improvements. Below is a more specific discussion of the activities involved in TIP development. 3-2 0 Others These categories provide a useful analysis tool and represent goals developed through an evaluation of the City’s transportation program in response to input from citizens and local officials and to State and Federal legislation. Taken as a whole,the five categories provide a framework for evaluating projects both individually and as part of a strategy that seeks to meet and balance the transportation needs of Renton during a time of increasing transportation demand,decreasing revenues, and growing environmental concerns. Although each project can be identified with an important concern that allows it to be classified into one of the five categories,most projects are intended to address,and are developed to be compatible with,multiple goals. Maintenance and Preservation of the Existing Infrastructure is a basic need that must be met by the program.The Mayor and City Council have emphasized the importanceof sustaining strong programs in this project category and maintaining our current infrastructure.Therefore more than half of the Transportation’s City Funds have historically been allocated under this category.The State Growth Management Act also requiresjurisdictions to assess and address the funding required to maintain their existing transportation systems.The City of Renton owns and maintains 250 centerline miles of streets. Corridor Projects are oriented toward “moving people”through a balanced transportation system that involves multiple modes of transportation.Included are facilities that facilitate the movement of transit and carpools.The Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21“Century Act (MAP-21),the State and Federal Clean Air legislation, and the State Commute Trip Reduction Act (CTR)have added momentum to regional efforts and placed requirements on local jurisdictions such as Renton to promote these transportation elements. Operations and Safety projects and programs are developed through ongoing analyses of the transportation system and are directed mainly toward traffic engineering concerns such as safety and congestion.Projects are identified not only by analysis of traffic counts,accident records and geometric data,but also through review and investigation of citizen complaints and requests. Non-Motorized Projects have been developed with major emphasis on addressing community quality of life issues by improving and/or protecting residential livability while providing necessary transportation system improvements.Bicycle and pedestrian projects are included in this category. Other Programs involve planning of transportation improvements necessitated by new development and new transportation capital improvements. Below is a more specific discussion of the activities involved in TIP development. 3-2 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 24 of 247 II. Specific TIP Development Activities TIP project and financial development activities are intricately intertwined and involve interactions with many groups and agencies at the local, regional, state and federal levels. Within the Transportation Systems Division of the City of Renton, project development involves year-around coordination among the Maintenance and Operations, the Planning and Programming and the Design Sections. The Transportation Maintenance and Operations Section compiles accident and traffic count data, performs level-of-service calculations needed to identify operational/congestion problems and tracks all transportation-related complaints, suggestions and requests that come into the City. The Transportation Design Section, through the TIP's Overlay Program and Bridge Inspection and Repair Program, works closely with the Maintenance Services Division to establish structural ratings for the City's roads and bridges. These and other data are being used by the Planning and Programming Section to develop transportation improvement projects, prepare grant applications, interface with ongoing state and federal transportation programs, and develop a TIP that supports the goals of the City's long-range Comprehensive Plan and short-range business plan. The Transportation Planning Section works with King County Metro Transit, the Puget Sound Regional Council, Sound Transit, and other groups and agencies to assure consistency between Renton's transportation policies and programs and those of the region. Such consistency is required by the Growth Management Act and related legislation and by federal and state grant programs. Ongoing transportation planning activities, such as updating the Transportation Element in the Comprehensive Plan and the development of sub-area plans, play an important part in identifying and prioritizing transportation improvement projects. Within the City of Renton, there are actions and interactions involving other departments and divisions, the private sector, the City Council and Administration, which strongly influence the direction of the transportation program. For example, the transportation system is significantly impacted by land use decisions, private development proposals and by public water and sewer extensions which increase transportation demand by making possible higher density and/or intensity of land uses. Such proposals need to be monitored and analyzed in regard to how they individually and collectively create the need for transportation improvements. All departments and divisions in the City, the City Council, and the Administration are solicited each year to provide input, discuss, and comment on the Six-Year TIP. 3-3 II.Specific TIP Development Activities TIP project and financial development activities are intricately intertwined and involve interactions with many groups and agencies at the local,regional,state and federal levels. Within the Transportation Systems Division of the City of Renton,project development involves year-around coordination among the Maintenance and Operations,the Planning and Programming and the Design Sections. The Transportation Maintenance and Operations Section compiles accident and traffic count data,performs level-of-service calculations needed to identify operational/congestion problems and tracks all transportation-related complaints, suggestions and requests that come into the City. The Transportation Design Section,through the TIP’s Overlay Program and Bridge Inspection and Repair Program,works closely with the Maintenance Services Division to establish structural ratings for the City’s roads and bridges. These and other data are being used by the Planning and Programming Section to develop transportation improvement projects,prepare grant applications,interface with ongoing state and federal transportationprograms,and develop a TIP that supports the goals of the City’s long-range Comprehensive Plan and short-range business plan. The Transportation Planning Section works with King County Metro Transit,the Puget Sound Regional Council,Sound Transit,and other groups and agencies to assure consistency between Renton’s transportation policies and programs and those of the region.Such consistency is required by the Growth Management Act and related legislation and by federal and state grant programs. Ongoing transportation planning activities,such as updating the Transportation Element in the Comprehensive Plan and the development of sub-area plans,play an important part in identifying and prioritizing transportation improvement projects. Within the City of Renton,there are actions and interactions involving other departments and divisions,the private sector,the City Council and Administration,which strongly in?uence the direction of the transportation program.For example,the transportation system is significantly impacted by land use decisions,private developmentproposals and by public water and sewer extensions which increase transportation demand by making possible higher density and/or intensity of land uses.Such proposals need to be monitored and analyzed in regard to how they individually and collectively create the need for transportation improvements. All departments and divisions in the City,the City Council,and the Administration are solicited each year to provide input,discuss,and comment on the Six—YearTIP. 3-3 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 25 of 247 Additional input is also gathered through interactions with other public and private organizations and through public meetings held in the community concerning specific transportation projects and programs. At the City, State and Federal level there are new laws and regulations that create the need for new or different kinds of transportation projects and programs. Examples include the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 2151 Century Act (MAP-21), the Growth Management Act, the Clean Air Act, the Commute Trip Reduction law, the Endangered Species Act and the Surface Water Management Ordinance. All of these laws have tremendous impacts on the development and costs of transportation projects. Interconnection and/or interdependence among TIP projects and with projects by other City departments and by other jurisdictions is another element that affects the development, the prioritization and the timing of transportation projects. Equally important is the likelihood, the time frame and the amount of outside funding that will be obtainable to finance transportation projects. In summary, with its heavy dependence on many different and unpredictable sources of outside funding and with the significant impacts created by ongoing local and regional land use decisions, transportation project development is a continuous activity comprised of a multitude of diverse elements. 3-4 Additional input is also gathered through interactions with other public and private organizations and through public meetings held in the community concerning speci?c transportation projects and programs. At the City,State and Federal level there are new laws and regulations that create the need for new or different kinds of transportationprojects and programs.Examples include the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21“Century Act (MAP-21),the Growth Management Act,the Clean Air Act,the Commute Trip Reduction law,the Endangered Species Act and the Surface Water Management Ordinance.All of these laws have tremendous impacts on the development and costs of transportation projects. Interconnection and/or interdependence among TIP projects and with projects by other City departments and by other jurisdictions is another element that affects the development,the prioritization and the timing of transportation projects.Equally important is the likelihood,the time frame and the amount of outside funding that will be obtainable to finance transportation projects. In summary,with its heavy dependenceon many different and unpredictable sources of outside funding and with the significant impacts created by ongoing local and regional land use decisions,transportation project development is a continuous activity comprised of a multitude of diverse elements. 3-4 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 26 of 247 CITY OF RENTON -PUBLIC WORKS -TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION -2016-2021 TIP Six-Year Total Project l"~e TIP Priority Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Period Total Funded Unfunded c 36 . NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 1,037,300 111,600 1,148,900 1,148,900 0 i 37 . N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 355,220 38,254 393,474 393,474 ~ Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 2,010,000 10,121,000 5,572,000 4,549,000 : 1 1 ! 2 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 4,358,000 2,179,000 2,179,000 11. oil 27 3 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 .. 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 372,000 372,000 u 23 4 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 530,000 180,000 350,000 c .. c 21 5 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 660,000 660,000 ~ 22 6 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 1,180,200 1,180,200 ·a; :::E 24 7 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 115,000 4 . SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A . SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 150,000 150,000 150,000 15 . S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 8,801,500 101,500 8,700,000 11 . Carr Road Improvements 2,250,000 200,000 2,450,000 2,250,000 200,000 3 . Logan Ave N Improvements 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 26,075,520 1,395,520 24,680,000 8 . Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 888,375 888,375 888,375 7 1 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 20,106,000 1,806,000 18,300,000 Ill NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 28,800,000 1,200,000 27,600,000 -12 2 u Gl 35 3 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 3,965,000 4,365,000 400,000 3,965,000 0 ... a.. 6 5 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 16,021,000 1,856,000 14,165,000 ... 17 5 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington B 815,000 1,330,000 2,030,000 4,175,000 61,000 4,114,000 0 "'0 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 11,620,000 11,620,000 ·;: 5 6 0 9 7 Park Ave N Extension 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 0 13 8 Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 22,200,000 16 9 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 3,275,000 3,275,000 10 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 700,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 10,200,000 700,000 9,500,000 33 11 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 38 12 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase ! 100,000 4,400,000 4,500,000 4,500,000 34 13 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 14 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th AveS 50,000 8,000,000 8,050,000 8,050,000 Gl 25 1 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 'liil:' en 26 2 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 265,000 "'0 19 1 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 Gl ' N 18 2 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 14,556,000 1,096,000 13,460,000 c ·-~s 29 3 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 206,000 206,000 0 == 20 4 Walkway Program 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,350,000 800,000 550,000 31 1 Arterial Circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 885,000 ... 30 2 Gl Project Development & Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 710,000 .c 32 3 Environmental Monitoring Program -0 28 4 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 180,000 32 5 1% for the Arts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 90,000 Total Sources 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 434,514,522 31,960,769 190,537,200 • Project under development ByTYPI 3-5 DRAFT 134PM CITYOF BENTON -PUBLIC WORKS -TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION -2016-2021 TIP T1-e TIP Priority ProiectTitle 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Period Total Funded Unfunded NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 1,037,300 111,600 1,148,900 N 27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair 355,220 38,254 393,474 Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 5,572,000 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 2,179,000 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 Bridge inspection &Repair Program 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 SW 27th StIStrander Blvd connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 150,000 150,000 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 101,500 Carr Road Improvements 2,250,000 200,000 2,250,000 Logan Ave N Improvements 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 26,075,520 1,395,520 24,680,000 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 888,375 888,375 888,375 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (_S3rd St to NW 3rd Pl)1,806,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 1,806,000 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor 1,200,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 1,200,000 Sunset LaneINE 10th St Roadway Improvement 400,000 400,000 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 1,856,000 Houser Way N-N 8th St to Lake Washington B 1,330,000 2,030,000 NE3rdINE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 Park Ave N Extension Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 116th Ave SE Improvements 700,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 700,000 Lake Washington Blvd N-Park Ave N to Gene 4 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 100,000 Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 400,000 1,650,000 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SWI68th Ave S 50,000 intersection Safety 8:Mobility Program 1,500,000 1,500,000 Traffic Safety Pro ram 265.000 265.000 Lake to Sound (L2S)Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 1,096,000 13,460,000 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 206,000 Walkway Program 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 800,000 550,000 Arterial Circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 ioject Development &Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 710,000 Environmental Monitoring Program ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 1%for the Arts Pro -ram 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Total Sources 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 434,514,522 31,960,769 190,537,200 'Project under development avTw- 0Maintenancea.Preservation-~:on cl .5 u M .. 30.9.O5IL L.O‘U':I-OU 3taua~1¢'nuIr.nuM-.5_n.nM.n6)us45UI«§UhI-ihbild-IR)-A Non-SafeMotorizedty 3-5 DRAFT 1:4 m5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 27 of 247 SECTION FOUR EXPENDITURES & REVENUES • Total Project Expenditure Summary • City of Renton Funds • Summary of Funding Sources • Itemized Funding Sources: • Vehicle Fuel Tax • Business License Fee • Proposed Fund Balance • Grants In-hand • Mitigation In-Hand • Other In-Hand • Undetermined 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9 4-10 SECTION FOUR EXPENDITURES &REVENUES Total Project Expenditure Summary City of Renton Funds Summary of Funding Sources Itemized Funding Sources: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In—hand Mitigation In—Hand Other In—Hand Undetermined 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 4-5 4-6 4-7 4-8 4-9 4-10 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 28 of 247 SIX-YEAR PROJECT COST SUMMARY* CITY OF RENTON-2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total Community Planning Area 1 Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 2,010,000 10,121,000 Citywide __ ---t-----l--730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 4,358,000 Citywide 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program '----,.----_3_ Logan Ave N Improvements 1,395,520 4 SW 27th St!Strander Blvd Connection ____ 1,240,000 ____!Q,OO.:.cO::...c,O.:.cOO=I---'6'-'-,0.:.cO:...:O"-',O:...:OO-=-I---'-7,440,0001_-=2-=-6'-=,0-'-75:=2'=.52=-0=-t-----C=ity Center Valley __ N/A 4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment 150,000 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 6 Duvall Ave NE-NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 _5,300,000 _8_ Main AveS/Downtown Circulation Project __ 1 ___ 8_8_8-"--,3_7_5-t-----t-----l-----1-----l 9 Park Ave N Extension 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 11 Carr Road Improvements --l------:,---7::-c:o~o'-,o_o_o t----___ 1_---::-6o-:-:o.oo_Q__J ,6oo,o_o_ot-_4_,_,1_4_o,_.o_oo_1 2,250,000 200,000 2,700,000 5,265,000 -3,000,000 3,160,000 150,000 11,620,000 ____!:!!_ghfands & East Plateau 16,021,000 Highlands & East Plateau 20,106,000 City Center 888,375 City Center 3,000,000 City Center 10,200,000 Benson 2,450,000 Talbot & Benson 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,8::..:0:-:0.c.:,0:..::0-=:01_:-:9-':,7::-:0-=:0'-::,0-=:00,_1 8,100,000 28,800,000 City Center, Highlands & East Plateau 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 Highlands ------ 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th AveS ____ ___ __ 50,000 8,000,0-:-00-=:I--8-?'-=:05-:-:0::...c,O::..:O:..::O-t-----=Wc...:....=.es='t'-'-H.:..cil.:....l ----I _1_5_ S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S --=---I--101,500 __ _ __ 1_-=2:..::0-=-0,'-=0-=-00=-!---'-1 ,400'-",o=-=o:..::o_1 __ 1:..c,3::..:0:..::0..c::,o:..::o-=-o1 5,800,000 8,801,500 City Center __ _ 16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS --t------I--5-=-0::...::0'-",0-"0-=-01 __ 1_,_,2"-'7-"5-'-',oo:...:....:.o.t-_1,500-'-',00:...:....:.0_t-----3,275,000 City,_C=-e=..:.n.:.:.te=..:.r ____ 1 17 HCiU&er Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washingto.:..:.n-=E=t---:--=-=-::-::-::-:.-t---:=::8-:-15=-<'-=-oo-:-:o=-t----'-1 '-::'3-=:3-=:0·c:-00-=:0::-t--=2,030,000 4,175,000 City Center 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail --t-1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 14,556,000 City Center 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 City Center & Valley 20 Walkway Program ----==----l---'1-=o~o.c:-o-=:oo,_1 __ -=2:.:::5-=:0'-::,o-=:o-::-o1 _ ___.:2::..:5:-:o.c.:.o:..::o-=:o1_---'2=-5::..:0"-',o::..:o:..::o-1 __ =-25::..:0:-.c,o::..:o::..:o,1 __ -=2-=-5o::.!'-=:oo::..:oo-1 __ 1'-'-,3::..:5::..:o'-".o::..:o:.:::o,1__ Citywide _ 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog ___ 1 00,000 _1_0_0'-,o_o_ot-_1_0_0_,_.0_0-'-01 ___ 1_3-'0,'--0_00-+-__ 1_3_0'-,0_0_01 __ 100,000 660,000 Citywide 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 1,180,200 Cedar River ~ Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 530,000 Citywide 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 _ ----'-C-"ityw,-'-"id:c.:e=------t 25 Intersection Safety,_&=-:.:Mc:..:o:..::b:..cilc:..:ityL.:-P-'-ro:..;g~r-=am:.:.:..... ___ 1 __ -=2=-5~0,-=:0-::-00=-1 __ 2=-=5-:-0-'-',o:..::o-=-o l----'2=-5::..:0:"-:,0::..:0-:-0_1 __ -=2-=-50-?'c::.o.,:-oo::-t---=2=-=5-=:0'-::,0-=:00,_1 __ 250,000 1 ,500,000 Citywide 26 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 Cityw_---,-id.,...e _____ 1 27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 -=-62=c'-=-o-=-oo=-t-----"'6-=-2'-'-,0-=-00-=--t __ ----.:6-=2-'-',oo_.::__:_of----'-'-62,000 62,000 372,000 _ Citywide 28 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 -=:3-=-0·c.:-oo-=:o::-I-----=-1 -=-80::.!'-:C-oo::..:oo-~--Citywide 29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41 ,000 206,000 Citywide 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program _ 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 N/A 31 Arterial Circulation Program ------l----'1-'4-=:5·c:-0-=:00=-!--145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 --:-N-::-:/A':'------J 32 1%fortheArts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 _ N/A 33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 City,_C_e_n_te_r ____ 1 34 Lind Ave sw-sw 16th s=::::t=-=t=-o-::S:...:W.:._:_43::.:r:..::d:....:S=-=t'----l----:-:c-=-=--=-=-ll-~ =-=-=-=---=-=-1 _____ 1 ___ 4..:...0:....:0'-'-,o=-=o:..::o-t----'1,-=-65=-0c..c,o-=-o=-=o,t----"-2,""3-'-50-'-',-=-oo-=-o"-1 4,400,000 Valley_ 35 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 3,965,000 4,365,000 Highlands 36 NE31stStBridgeReplacement 1,037,300 111,600 __ __ __1,148,900 Kennydafe 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 3-=-55=-<'=22=-0=-t----=-38"",2-=-54-'-l-----t----t-----::-::-=-=-:--=-l----: -:-=-:::-::-=l·---,-3::..:9:..::3-'-=,4:-':7-=4_1__ Kennyd=a::..::Je=-----J 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 100,000 4,400,000 4,500,000 City Genter Total Expenditures 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 222,497,969 •Including unfunded amounts. First Draft 0412712015 13:34 4-1 SIX-YEAR PROJECT COST SUMMARY * CITY OF RENTON -2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM Period ‘ProiectTitle 2016 ,_2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 i Total L_Community Planning Area 1 Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000,2,010,000:10,121,000 Citywide 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 730,000 836,000»882,000,930,000,980,000 4,358,000 Citywide 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 1 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000‘26,075,520 5 City Center 4 SW 27th Stlstrander Blvd Connection _Valley 4-A SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 150,000 A ,_150,000 N/A 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor '700,000‘3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000,11,620,000 Highlands &East Plateau 6 iDuvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1 1,856,000‘Y 1,910,000!2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 16,021,000 Highlands 8.East Plateau 7 Rainier Ave 3 Phase 4 (8 3rd St to NW3rd Pl)1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 20,106,000 CityCenter 8 Main Ave SlDowntown Circulation Project 888,375 4 888,375.‘City Center 9 Park Ave N Extension ,7 §'3,000,000;3,000,000 City Center 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 700,000’600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 ;3,160,000.10,200,000 T bBensBon11CarrRoadImprovements»2,250,000»*200,000 ‘2,450,000 al 01 &enson 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 28,800,000 City Center,Highlands &East Plateau 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 Highlands 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SWI68th Ave 5 50,000 8,000,000 8,050,000 West Hill 15 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 101,500 _200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 8,801 ,500l City Center 16 S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S _500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000,.3,275,000 CityCenter 17 Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington q 815,000:1,330,000 2,030,000‘,4,175,000 City Center 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail ~1,096,000!3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000‘3,310,000 14,556,000 City Center 19 Lake to Sound (L2S)Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 City Center &Valley 20 Walkway Program 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,350,000‘Citywide 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000,660,000 Citywide 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 5 ..1,180,200 Cedar River 23 Bridge Inspection &Repair Program 4 30,000 100,000‘100,000,100,000?100,000’100,000 530,000 Citywide 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program ,15,000 15,000‘15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 Citywide 25 Intersection Safety &Mobility Program ‘250,000 250,000 250,000 _ 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 +Citywide 26 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 Citywide 27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program _ 62,000 62,000 g 62,000 62,000 62,000 ;62,000 372,000 Citywide 28 ITS Program 30,000 30,000»30,000 30,000 30,000!30,000 180,000 Citywide 29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan implementation ?30,000.30,000.25,000.40,000 40,000 41,000 206,000 Citywide 30 Project Development &Pre-Design Program ;115,000l 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000’,N;A31ArterialCirculationProgram145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000‘NA 32 1%for the Arts Program 7 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 K N/A 33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 City Center 34 Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St _ 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 4,400,000 Valley 35 Sunset LanelNE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 3,965,000 ‘4,365,000 Highlands 36 NE31st St Bridge Replacement 1,037,300 111,600 ;*T 1,148,900 Kennydale V 37 N27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair 355,220 38,254..I 393,474 Kennydale 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phaset _+ #100,000 4,400,000 4,500,000 Ci Center Total Expenditures 14,940,91 5l 18,121 ,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651 ,000 65,608,000 222,497,969_ su.v..._p.q_s..u ‘Including unfunded amounts.04/27/2015 ml 4 -1 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 29 of 247 CITY FUNDS FUND BALANCE+VEHICLE FUEL TAX+BUSINESS LICENSE+IMPACT FEE+METRO MITIGATION+RESERVE+OTHER 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 773,000 887,000 920,000 960,000 1,002,000 1,030,000 5,572,000 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 365,000 418,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 2,179,000 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 7,859 7,859 --4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment 150,000 150,000 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 761 ,000 761,000 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 244,000 244,000 8 Main Ave 5/Downtown Circulation Project 376,000 376,000 9 Park Ave N Extension 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 95,000 95,000 11 Carr Road Improvements 4,787 4,787 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 548,032 548,032 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S 15 S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S 16,451 16,451 16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS 17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington 8 16,000 45,000 61,000 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 95,000 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 20 Walkway Program 100,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 800,000 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 660,000 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 --24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 26 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 372,000 28 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 206,000 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 31 Arterial Circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 32 1% for the Arts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 33 --Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 35 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 400,000 36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 142,115 15,090 157,205 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 1 '100 1,100 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 5 Total Sources 4,451,344 2,244,090 2,326,000 2,478,000 2,504,000 2,533,000 16,631,434 0412712015 13·34 4 - 2 First Draft 10 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 V24 25 26 27 28 29 30 032 33 '34 35 36 37 38 CITYFUNDS FUNDBALANCE+VEH|CLE FUEL TAX+BUSlNESS L|CENSE+lMPACT FEE+METRO MIT|GATlON+RESERVE+OTHER 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED T _ Project Title StreetOverlay Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th StlstranderBlvd Connection‘SW27th St -Loan Repayment NE 3rdINE 4th Corridor «Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Rainier Ave 8 Phase4 (8 3rd St to NW 3rd Pl) ‘‘MainAves/DowntownCirculation Project Park Ave N Extension 116th Ave SE Improvements Carr RoadImprovements TNESunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Sunset AreaGreen Connections Oakesdale Ave SWIMonster Rd SWI68th Ave sf‘s 7th St -RainierAves to Talbot nu s S Grady Way -TTalbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S Houser Way N -N8th St to Lake WashingtonI: 7 Lake Washington Loop Trail Lake to Sound (L2S)Trail Walkway Program Sidewalk Rehabilitationand ReplacemProg T‘MapleValley Highway Attenuator Bridge Inspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety andGuardrailProgram Intersection Safety &Mobility Program Traffic Safety Program PreservationofTrafficOper Device Program TT ITS Program Barrier-Free TransitionPlan Implementation Project Development &Pre—Design Program Arterial Circulation Program 1%Tforthe ArtsProgram Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1LindAveSW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St "SunsetLane/NE 10thSt Roadway Improvemen NE 31st St Bridge Replacement N27th Pl CulvertScour Repair Rainier Ave NCorridorImprovements K-Phase5 ‘Total Sources _ 2016 T 773,000, 7,359 150,000 761,000 244,000 376,000 95,000 4,787 548,032. 16,451 100,000 100,000 30,000 _15000 T 250,000 40,000 62,000 30,000 30,000 115,000 145,000 15,000 400,000, 142,115 1,100 4,451,344‘ 4-2 2017 2013 T337,000 T 920,000 365,000 413,000 16,000 140,000 140,000 100,000 100,000 30,000 30,000 15,000,15,000 250,000 T 250,000 45,000.45,000 62,000 62,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 25,000 115,000 115,000 145,000;145,000 15,000 T 15,000 15,090 2,244,090 2,326,000 First Draft Period 2019 2020 2021 T Total 960,000 1,002,000 1,030,000 5,572,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 2,179,000 7,359 150,000 761,000 244,000 376,000 95,000 4,737, 543,032? 16,451 45,000 61,000 95,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 300,000 130,000 T 130,000 100,000 660,000 30,0007 30,000 30,000 7 130,000 20,000:T25T,T000T 25,000 115,000 250,000 250,000 T 250,000 1,500,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 62,000 T 62,000 62,000 372,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 130,000 40,000 40,000 41.000 206,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 150,000,150,000 T 150,000 335,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 400,000 157,205 1,100 2,473,000:2,504,0002,T533,To0016,631,434 0021/2115 ‘I3345c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 30 of 247 SUMMARY OF FUNDING SOURCES 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period ITEM 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Period Total SIX-YEAR PROJECT COSTS: --Planning 400,000 255,000 463,000 275,000 415,000 270,000 2,078,000 Design 4,243,500 931,000 4,165,000 9,425,000 1,275,000 11,525,000 31,564,500 R-0-W (includes Admin) 1,426,500 3,590,000 3,260,000 14,600,000 3,800,000 4,000,000 30,676,500 Construction Contract 7,175,560 11,164,500 10,723,700 18,674,000 44,661,000 41,488,000 133,886,760 --Construction Management 1,675,355 2,146,354 1,710,500 2,810,000 7,465,000 8,290,000 24,097,209 -Other/ Post Const. Services 20,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 195,000 Sub-TOTAL SIX-YEAR COST 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 222,497,969 -- SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 4,050,000 ---Business License Fee 2,073,000 2,114,090 2,156,000 2,200,000 2,243,000 2,288,000 13,074,090 Fund Balance+Held reserve 970,344 970,344 Grants In-Hand 10,399,571 134,764 10,534,335 Mitigation In-Hand -376,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 Other In-Hand 495,000 2,250,000 2,550,000 5,671,000 Sub-TOTAL SIX-YEAR FUNDED 14,963,915 5,163,854 5,381,000 2,885,000 2,938,000 2,993,000 34,324,769 I Undetermined 13,493,000 15,481,200 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 190,537,200 Sub-TOTAL SIX-YEAR UNFUNDED 13,493,000 15,481,200 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 190,537,200 I Not allocated Business License 18,000 535,000 505,000 407,000 434,000 460,000 2,359,000 TOTAL SOURCES-FUNDED & UNFUNDED 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 220,318,969 1 Not included in the programmed above 0412712015 13:34 4 - 3 First Draft SUMMARY OF FUNDING SOURCES 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED 2017 Period Total SIX-YEAR PROJECT COSTS:. Planning 400,000 255,000 463,000 275,000 415,000 270,000 2,078,000 Design 4,243,500 931,000 4,165,000 9,425,000 1,275,000 11,525,000 31,564,500 R-O-W (includes Admin)1,426,500 3,590,000 3,260,000 14,600,000 3,800,000 4,000,000 30,676,500 Construction Contract 7,175,560 11,164,500 10,723,700 18,674,000 44,661,000 41,488,000 133,886,760 Construction Management 1,675,355 2,146,354 1,710,500 2,810,000 7,465,000 8,290,000 _24,097,209 Other/Post Const.Services 20,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 195,000 EAR COST 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,851,000 65,608,000 222,497,969 5: Vehicle Fuel Tax 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 Business License Fee 2,073,000 2,114,090 2,156,000 2,200,000 2,243,000 2,288,000 Fund Balance+Held reserve 970,344 Grants In-Hand 10,399,571 134,764 M?gation In-Hand 376,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Other In-Hand 495,000 2,250,000 2,550,000 Sub -TOTAL SIX-YEAR FUNDED 14,963,915 5,163,854 5,381,000 2,885,000 2,938,000 Undetermined 13,493,000 15,481,200 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 Sub -TOTAL SIX-YEARUNFUNDED 13,493,000 15,481 ,200 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 Not allocated Business License 18,000 535,000 505,000 407,000 434,000 460,000 TOTAL SOURCES -FUNDED&UNFUNDED 14,940,915 18,121,854 20,357,200 45,819,000 57,651,000 65,608,000 220,318,969 ‘Not included in the programmed above M21/2015 1:34 4 -3 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 31 of 247 VEHICLE FUEL TAX 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay __ 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 4,050,000 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program '----a-----------------------Logan Ave N Improvements ~ SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection ------------ -----4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment --5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor --r-----6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE ---------------7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) ------~ --8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project -------------9 Park Ave N Extension ------·-----------10 _!16th Ave SE Improvements I~ ----Carr Road Improvements ----------12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor ------13 Sunset Area Green Connections ----14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S --t-----15 S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S ---16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS 17 Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington 8 ----------18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail ----20 Walkway Program --21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog ----22 ~aple Valley Highway Attenuator ----------23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program ------------------24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program ----------25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program -----26 Traffic Safety Program -----------27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program --------28 ITS Program -29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation ---------30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program ----1-1---31 Arterial Circulation Pro9ram -------------32 1% for the Arts Prog~m ----------------33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene ------------------------34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 35 Sunset Lane/NE 1Oth St Roadway lmprovemen ------~ -36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement ---------37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase Total Sources 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 4,050,000 Gu_Te• 0412712015 13:34 4 - 4 First Draft VEHICLE FUEL TAX 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED if Pro'ect Title ‘ ‘Street Overlay 650,000 660.000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 4,050,000 Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th Stlstrander Blvd Connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment NE 3rdINE 4th Corridor 'Duva|l Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Rainier Ave 5 Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd Pl_) Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project Park Ave N Extension 116th Ave SE Improvements Carr Road Improvements NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Sunset Area Green Connections Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SWI68th Ave S S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington E Lake Washington Loop Trail ¢Lake to Sound (L28)Trail 1 lwalkway ProgramlsidewalkRehabilitation and Replacem Prog Maple Valley Highway Attenuator ‘Bridge Inspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Intersection Safety &Mobility Program “TrafficSafety Program Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program ITS Program Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation ‘ProjectDevelopment &Pre-Design Program ;ArteriaICirculation Program 1%for the Arts Program 'Lake Washington Blvd N-Park Ave Nto Gene Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St L Sunset LanelNE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen NE 31st St Bridge Replacement N 21th Pl Culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase ‘TotalSources 660,000 -670,000 3 I I O4l27@I5 V3234Ga|_Tax 4 -4 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 32 of 247 BUSINESS LICENSE FEE 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 123,000 227,000 250,000 280,000 312,000 330,000 1,522,000 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 365,000 418,000 441 ,000 465,000 490,000 2,179,000 3 Logan Ave N Improvements --4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment 150,000 150,000 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 511 ,000 511,000 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 244,000 244,000 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 9 Park Ave N Extension 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 95,000 95,000 11 Carr Road Improvements 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th AveS 15 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington B 16,000 45,000 61,000 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 20 Walkway Program 100,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 800,000 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 660,000 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 25 . Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 26 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 240,000 27 . Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 372,000 28 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 ~ Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 206,000 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 31 Arterial Circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 32 1% for the Arts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 35 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 15,090 15,090 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase Not Allocated-To Fund Balance 18,000 535,000 505,000 407,000 434,000 460,000 2,359,000 Total Sources 2,073,000 2,114,090 2,156,000 2,200,000 2,243,000 2,288,000 13,074,090 4 - 5 First Draft hhih)-51D@‘\lO)UI 10 11 12 13 I14 15 16 17 T 13 19 20 T21,_22 23 IT24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 I32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Bush BUSINESS LICENSE FEE 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED _ Project Title 201 6 Street Overlay 123,000 Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th StlstranderBlvd connection TSW27thSt-Loan Repayment 150,000 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor _ Duvall Ave NE -NE4th St to Sunset Blvd NE _T 511,000 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (3 3rdSt to NW3rd Pl)244,000 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project Park Ave NExtension 116th Ave SEImprovements 95,000 CarrRoad Improvements NESunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Sunset Area Green Connections _OakesdaleAve SW/MonsterRd SWl68th AveS S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S Houser Way N-TN 8th St to Lake Washington < Lake Washington Loop Trail Lake to Sound (L25)Trail Walkway Program _100,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator TT 1 Bridge Inspection &Repair Program 30,000 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000» Intersection Safety &Mobility Program 250,000 Traffic Safety Program T _40,000, Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program T, 62,000 ITS Program _30,000: Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 Project Development &Pre-Design Program 115,000‘ ArterialCirculationProgram 145,000: 1%for the Arts Program TT 15,000 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave Nto Gene T Lind Ave SW -SW16th St to SW 43rd St Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway Improvemen: NE31st St Bridge Replacement N 27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair RainierAve N Corridor Improvements -Phase TT _ Not Allocated -To Fund Balance 18,000 ‘TotalSources T,2,073,000 4-5 2017 T 227,000 365,000 140,000 100,000 30,000 T 15,000 250,000 40,000 62,000 30,000 30,000 115,000 145,000 15,00011 15,090 535,000 2013 250,000 419,000 16,000" 140,000, 100,000 30,000 15,000 ' 250,000 40,000 62,000 30,000 25,000 115,000 145,000 15,000 505,000 2,114,090 2,156,000 First Draft 2019 _ 230,000 441,000 45,000 140,000 130,000 30,000, 20,000 250,000 40,000 62,000 30,000 40,000 120,000 150,000 15,000 T 407,0001 2,200,000 2020 T 31 2,000 465,000 140,000, 130,000 T T 30,000 25,000 250,000 40,000 62,000 30,000 40,000 120,000 150,000 15,000 434,000? 2,243,000 2021 T 330,000 490,000 140,000 100,000 30,000 T 25,000T 250.000 40.000 62.000 30,000‘ T 41.000 125.000 150,000’ 15,000 460,000 2,288,000 Period Total 1,522,000: 2,179,000 150,000 511,000 244,000 95,000’ T 61,000 300,000 660,000 180,000 115,000 1,500,000: 240,000 372,000 180,000 ‘ 206,000 710,000 885,000 T 90,000 15,090T 2,359,000 13,074,0905c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 33 of 247 USE OF FUND BALANCE + HELD RESERVE FOR 2015 MATCH 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 7,859 7,859 4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 250,000 250,000 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) -- 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project --9 Park Ave N Extension -----10 116th Ave SE Improvements --11 Carr Road Improvements 4,787 4,787 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 548,032 548,032 13 Sunset Area Green Connections --14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S 15 S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S 16,451 16,451 16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS 17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington E 18 Lake Washington Loop Trail ----19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 20 Walkway Program 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator --23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 26 Traffic Safety Program 1""27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 28 ITS Program 29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 31 Arterial Circulation Program ---32 1 o/o for the Arts Program 33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St ---35 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen ----36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 142,115 142,115 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 1,100 1,100 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase Total Sources 970,344 970,344 P~ed Ft.rod a.nce 0412712015 4 - 6 First Draft USE OF FUND BALANCE +HELD RESERVE FOR 2015 MATCH 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED ProiectTitle 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 25 26 27 28 29 s9_ 31 32 .33. 34 35 36 37 38 A MainAve SIDowntown Circulation Project 'Oakesdale Ave SWIMonster Rd SW/68th Ave s ' Lake to Sound (gs)Trail , Street Overlay Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th St/§_trander Blvd Connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment LI_‘I_E_3rdINE 4th Corridor Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset BlvdNE y Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (5 3rd st to NW3rd PI) .l.. Park Ave N Extension 116th Ave SE Improvements Carr Road Improvements 1 (- §NESunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Sunset Area Green Connections rS 7th St 1Rainier Ave S to_1'albotRd S S Grady Way -Talbot Rd §_to Rainier Ave S» Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington 3 7,859i_ 250,000 4,737 543.03g 16,451 Lake Washington Loop Trail Walkwayigram Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog llIl_apIeValley Highway Attenuator Bjge Inspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program ,lntersection Safety &Mobility Program Traffic Safety Program __ _Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program QITSProgram Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation Project Development &Pre-Design Program Arterial girculation Program 1%for the Arts Program ‘_yLa_l<_e@.l1i_ngtonBlvd N -Park Ave Nto Gene Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St__ SunsetLaneINE 10thSt Roadway Improvemen‘ NE 31st St Bridge Replacement N27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave N corridor Improvements -Phas 4 Total Sources I 142,115; 1,1oq 970,344 2 250,009 4,787 548,032 16,451 142,115 jm 1,100 97o,344_’ Prwuui?tlldaahma 4-6 First Draft D4/Z7/2015 I3645c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 34 of 247 GRANTS IN-HAND 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 1,387,661 1,387,661 4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St-Loan Re~yment 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,095,000 . 1,095,000 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 1,562,000 1,562,000 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 512,375 512,375 9 Park Ave N Extension --10 116th Ave SE Improvements 605,000 605,000 11 Carr Road Improvements 2,245,213 2,245,213 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 656,968 656,968 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th AveS 15 S 7th St-Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 85,049 85,049 16 S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S ----Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington! 17 ----18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1,001,000 1,001,000 ---· 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 20 Walkway Program 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program ----26 Traffic Safety Program -- -- 27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 28 ITS Program ----29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 31 Arterial Circulation Program --32 1% for the Arts Program ·--33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 34 Lind Ave SW ~ SW 16th St to SW 43rd St ---·--·---·-35 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 895,185 96,510 991,695 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 354,120 38,254 392,374 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase Total Sources 10,399,571 134,764 10,534,335 4 - 7 First Draft TIP 1 2 3 4 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED 5 7 Project Title StreetOverlay AArterialRehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th Stlstrander Blvd Connection 4-A SW27th St -Loan Repayment 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 '23 24 25 T 26 27 25 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 7 _ DuvallAve NE -NE 4th St to SunsetBlvd NE Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd Pl) MainAve SlDowntown Circulation Project Park Ave _NExtension 116th Ave SE Improvements Carr Road Improvements NE Sunset Boulevard(SR 900)Corridor Sunset Area Green Connections Oakesdale Ave SWIMonster Rd SWI68th Ave S S 7th St -RainierAve S to Talbot Rd S S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S Houser Way N-N 8th St to Lake Washington Lake Washington Loop Trail Lake to Sound (L25)Trail Walkway Program _SidewalkRehabilitation and Replacem Prog Maple Valley Highway Attenuator Bridge Inspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program IntersectionSafety &Mobility Program Traffic Safety Program Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program ITS Program Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation Project Development &Pre-Design Program Arterial CirculationProgram 1%for the Arts Program Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene I Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St Sunset LaneINE 10th St Roadway Improvement NE 31st St Bridge Replacement N 27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase. _TotaISources Grnmrh-HUI1 GRANTS IN-HAND Z 2016 1,387,661 1,095,000 1,562,000 512,375 605,000 2,245,213’ 656,968 85,049 1,001 .000‘ 895,185 354.120 10,399,571 4-7 2017 1 2018 96,510} 38,254 134,764 First Draft 2019 2020 2021 Period Total 1,387,661 1,095,000 1,562,000 512,375 605,000 2,245,213 656,966 35,049 1,001,000 991,695 392,374 10,534,335 15c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 35 of 247 MITIGATION IN-HAND (IMPACT FEES) 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay __ -2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor -- I_!_ Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project 376,000 376,000 9 Park Ave N Extension 10 116th Ave SE Improvements 11 Carr Road Improvements 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 13 Sunset Area Green Connections 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S ------15 S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S ------------------16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS _ -17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington E I__!!_ Lake Washington Loop Trail 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 20 Walkway Pro9ram 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 22 ~aple Valley Highway Attenuator _ -23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 24 'Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 26 --Traffic Safety Program 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 25,000 27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 28 ITS Program 29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 131 Arterial Circulation Program 32 1% for the Art_! Program 33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene ---·---------~ ------------34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 1-:c 35 Sunset LaneiNE 1Oth St Roadway lmproveme11 36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 37 N 27th PI Culvert Sc~ur Repair 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor lm_provements -Phase Not Allocated-To Mitigation Balance 593,000 626,000 645,000 665,000 685,000 705,000 3,919,000 Total Sources 969,000 631,000 650,000 670,000 690,000 710,000 4,320,000 .. .. ProJects non-ehg1ble for use of m111gat1on fees 0412712015 ,,.. 4-8 First Draft MITIGATIONIN-HAND(IMPACT FEES) 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED 5”) 25 27 ' 28 29 3o_ 31 32 33 34 35 /.Main7AveSIDowntown Circulation Project '11I5thAve SE Improvements ENESunset Boulevard (sn 900)corridor 0 26 _iTrafIicSafety Program Project Title Street Overlay LArterialRehabilitation_Program __ Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th StIStrander Blvd Connection SW27thSt -L039,Repayment NE 3rdINE 4th Corridor Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Rainier AveS Phase 4 (S 3rdSt to_NW3rd Pl)l Park Ave N Extension Carr Road Improvements Sunset AreaGreenConnections I S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S hoyser Wav_N_-_N,8!b§i toLi;-|se_W§§hin9t°n E1 Lake Washington Loop Trail !-i'<339,§9"!!d._(':2$),T!a" Walkway Program Sidewalk Rehabilitationand Replacemjrcg __ Maple Valley Highway Attenuator Bridge Inspection 8-?gpair Pro9ram_ ,L _ Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program IntersectionSafe_ty_&MobilityProgram Preservationof Traffic Oper DeviceProgram _yITSProgram Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation PTQIEEID9,‘!¢I2P"'€I“3‘P"°'De5i9!‘tPI°,9'3"'_ Arterial Circulation Program 1%for the Arts Program Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave Nto Gene 5LindAveSW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St : Sunset LaneINE 10th St Roadway Improvemeng NE31stStBridge Replacement 7 ‘ N27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave NCorridor Improvements ~Phase Not Allocated -To Mitigation Balance Total Sources I “T _Oakesdale Ave SWIMonster Rd SW/68th Ave sf"if S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 37’s,o?)o’" ,.,,__¥‘_ 969,000 593,000 ‘ 626,000 631,000 1 .22--‘___,1_e 645.000 ’ 650,000 |665,000|_ 670,000 685,000" 590,000 705,000 710,000 Projects non-eligibleforuse oi mitigation fees 4-8 First Draft D-IIZ7I2015 3,919,000 I3345c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 36 of 247 OTHER IN-HAND (INCLUDES: GENERAL FUND, AIRPORT AND DEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS) 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection 4-A SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) ----- 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project --- 9 Park Ave N Extension --10 116th Ave SE Improvements --- 11 Carr Road Improvements 12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 13 Sunset Area Green Connections --14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th AveS 15 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S - 16 S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington B ·------18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 95,000 95,000 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 20 Walkway Program 21 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog ----- 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator --23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program ---- 25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 26 Traffic Safety Program ----27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program ----28 ITS Program ------29 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation --30 Project Development & Pre-Design Program --31 Arterial Circulation Program --32 1% for the Arts Program --33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 ----2,000,000 34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St ---35 Sunset Lane/NE 1Oth St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 400,000 36 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement -------- 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair ------ 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase Total Sources 495,000 2,250,000 2,550,000 5,295,000 0412712015 13:34 4 - 9 First Draft TIP 563,10 4A CDNNOIUI 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ‘24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34_ 35 36 37 38 OTHER IN-HAND(INCLUDES:GENERALFUND,AIRPORT ANDDEVELOPER CONTRIBUTIONS) 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED b _Project Title Street Overlay LArterialRehabilitationProgram Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th Stlstrander Blvd Connection ‘SW27th St -LoanRepayment NE 3rdINE 4th Corridor DuvallAve NE;NE 4th St to Sunset BlvdNE Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW3rd PI), Main Ave S/DowntownCirculation Project Park Ave NExtension 116th Ave SE Improvements Carr Road Improvements NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Sunset Area Green Connections Oakesdale AveSwlllllonsterRd SW/68th Ave S S 7th St;RainierAvesto TalbotRd S _L _SGrady Way -Talbot Rd S to RainierAve S KHouserWayN-N 8th St to Lake Washington LakeWashington Loop Trail Lake to Sound (L23)Trail Walkway Program Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog [MapleValley Highway Attenuator Bridge Inspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Intersection Safety &Mobility Program Traffic Safety Program ‘Preservation of Traffic Oper»Device Program ITSProgram I Barrier-FreeTransition Plan Implementation Project Development 8:Pre-Design Program Arterial Circulation Program 1%for the Arts Program Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave Nto Gene Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St SunsetLaneINE 10th St Roadway Improvemeni NE31st St Bridge Replacement N 27th Pl culvert Scour Repair Rainier Ave N CorridorImprovements -Phase VTotalSources_ Duzenh,Hand 2016 95,000 g 400,000 495,000 I 4 -9 2017 2018 1,250,000 1,550,000 1,000,000 L 0 1,000,000 2,250,000 f 2,550,000 5 First Draft 201 9 2020 2021 04/27/2015 Period T033‘,.. 95,000 2,800,000 2,000,000 400,000 5,295,000 1323!5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 37 of 247 UNDETERMINED 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Period TIP Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Total 1 Street Overlay 837,000 870,ooq_ 910,000 952,000 980,000 4,549,000 i-2 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 365,000 418,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 2,179,000 3 Logan Ave N Improvements 1,240,000 --10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 24,680,000 4 SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection ---4-A SW 27th St-Loan Repayment ----5 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 11,620,000 ----6 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 14,165,000 --7 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 2,400,0QQ. _4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 18,300,000 8 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project Park Ave N Extension ------9 3,000,000 3,000,000 ---10 116th Ave SE Improvements 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 9,500,000 --1-11 Carr Road Improvements 200,000 200,000 ----12 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 27,600,000 ------13 Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 14 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S 50,000 8,000,000 8,050,000 ---15 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 8,700,000 --16 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 3,275,000 17 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington J! 815,000 1,314,000 1,985,000 4,114,000 --18 Lake Washington Loop Trail 3,750,000 _1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 13,460,000 19 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail -20 Walkway Program 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 550,000 21 Sidewalk_Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 22 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181 ,000 999,200 1,180,200 23 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 350,000 --24 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 1-------25 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program --'-1-26 Traffic Safety Pr~gram -----27 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program --·~ ----------!-28 ITS Program Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation --29 ----30 ~ject Development & Pre-Design Program -------------31 Arterial Circulation Program___ __ 1""32 -----------1% for the Arts Program --33 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene -34 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 4,400,000 135 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 3,965,000 3,965,000 -· 36 ~31st St Bridge Replaceme.!!!__ 37 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair -. 38 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 100,000 4,400,000 4,500,000 Total Undetermined 13,493,000 15,481,200 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 190,537,200 04127/2015 4-10 First Draft TIP 5 20 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 ..1nIundcd_ UNDETERMINED 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED 1 Project Title Street Overlay Arterial Rehabilitation Program Logan Ave N Improvements SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment fur:3rd/NE 4m Corridor 1DuvaIlAve NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW3rd PI) ‘Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project Park Ave N Extension ,116thAve SE Improvements {Carr Road Improvements NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)corridor Sunset Area Green Connections Oakesdale Ave SWIMonster Rd SW/68th Ave S S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 1 Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington 4 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1, ‘Laketo Sound (L2S)Trail VhwalkwayProgram 1SidewalkRehabilitation and Replacem Prog jMapleValley Highway Attenuator IBridgeInspection &Repair Program Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Intersection Safety &Mobility Program Traffic Safety Program Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program ITS Program Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation ‘ProjectDevelopment &Pre-Design Program ‘1ArterialCirculation Program 1%for the Arts Program Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway Improvemen L NE 31st St Bridge Replacement .N27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair {RainierAve N Corridor Improvements —Phase Total Undetermined Sun 11I 2016S ‘Period 2017 2013 2019 2020 2021 Total 337,000 370,000 1 952,000 _ 930,000 4,549,000 335,000 ___413,_0_0_0_441,000 A _465,000 g _49_0,9c_>0__2,17_9,000,1,240,000,10,000,000:6,000,000,7,440,000 24,680,000 700,000 9 3,540,000 4,630,000 2,700,000 11,620,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,630,000 5,265,000 14,165,000 2,400,000;4,100,000 6,500,000‘5,300,000,j 13,300,000 3,000,000‘3,000,000 |600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 9,500,000 200,000 200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,300,000 9,700,000 3,100,000 27,600,000 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 1 1 4 50,000 3,000,000 3,050,000.200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,300,000 3,700,000 500.0001 1,275,000 1,500,000 3,275,000 315,000 1,314,000 1,935,000 4,114,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 13,460,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 550,000 131,000[,999,200 1,130,200 70,0001 70,000 70,000?70,000.70,000,350,000 £1 1 . 1 1 ;400,000?1,650,000?2,350,000,4,400,000 3,965,000 ‘3,965,000 100,000 4,400,000’4,500,000 43,341,000 55,147,000 63,075,000 190,537,200 04/27/201 55c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 38 of 247 SECTION FIVE PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS • Summary of TIP Projects & Costs • Detailed Project Descriptions 5-la 5-1 to 5-38 SECTION FIVE PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS 0 Summary of TIP Projects &Costs 5-la 0 Detailed Project Descriptions 5-1 to 5-38 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 39 of 247 TIP 1 2 3 4 4-A 5 6 7 8 9 10 --11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23. 24 25 26 27 28 --29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 CITY OF RENTON-PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2014-2019 TIP Total Project Costs Project Title 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 2,010,000 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 Logan Ave N Improvements 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 SW 27th St!Strander Blvd Connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 150,000 NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 {S 3rd St to NW 3rd PI) 1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 Main AveS/Downtown Circulation Project 888,375 ParkAve N Extension 3,000,000 116th Ave SE Improvements 700,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 Carr Road Improvements 2,250,000 200,000 NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor 1,200,000 1,000,000 . 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Rd SW/68th Ave S 50,000 8,000,000 S 7th St-Rainier AveS to Talbot Rd S 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 S Grady Way-Talbot Rd S to Rainier AveS 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington 8 815,000 1,330,000 2,030,000 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 Walkway Program 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 Intersection Safety & Mobility Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 Project Development & Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 Arterial Circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 1% for the Arts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 Lind Ave SW-SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway lmprovemen 400,000 3,965,000 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 1,037,300 111,600 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair 355,220 38,254 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 100,000 4,400,000 Total Sources 14 940 915 18121 854 20357200 45 819 000 57651000 65 608 000 Six-Year Total Total Period Total Funded Unfunded 10,121,000 5,572,000 4,549,000 4,358,000 2,179,000 2,179,000 26,075,520 1,395,520 24,680,000 150,000 150,000 11,620,000 11,620,000 16,021,000 1,856,000 14,165,000 20,106,000 1,806,000 18,300,000 888,375 888,375 3,000,000 3,000,000 10,200,000 700,000 9,500,000 2,450,000 2,250,000 200,000 28,800,000 1,200,000 27,600,000 22,200,000 22,200,000 8,050,000 8,050,000 8,801,500 101,500 8,700,000 3,275,000 3,275,000 4,175,000 61,000 4,114,000 14,556,000 1,096,000 13,460,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 1,350,000 800,000 550,000 660,000 660,000 1,180,200 1,180,200 530,000 180,000 350,000 115,000 115,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 265,000 265,000 372,000 372,000 180,000 180,000 206,000 206,000 710,000 710,000 885,000 885,000 90,000 90,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 4,365,000 400,000 3,965,000 1,148,900 1,148,900 393,474 393,474 4,500,000 4,500,000 222497 969 31 960 769 190,537,200 T o1a1 PI'Ofect Coatt 1 34 PM 5-1a Draft CITY OF RENTON -PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2014 -2019 TIP Total Project Costs Six-Year Total Total Project Title 2021 Period Total Funded Unfunded Street Overlay 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 2,010,000 10,121,000 5,572,000 4,549,000 Arterial Rehabilitation Program 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 4,358,000 2,179,000 2,179,000 Logan Ave NImprovements 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 26,075,520 1,395,520 24,680,000 SW 27th Stlstrander Blvd Connection SW 27th St -Loan Repayment 150,000 150,000 150,000 NE 3rdINE 4th Corridor 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 11,620,000 11,620,000 Duvall Ave NE -NE4th St to Sunset Blvd NE 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 16,021,000 1,856,000 14,165,000 Rainier Ave S Phase 4 (S 3rd St to NW3rd PI)1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 20,106,000 1,806,000 18,300,000 Main Ave SIDowntown Circulation Project 888,375 888,375 888,375 ParkAve N Extension 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 116th Ave SE Improvements 700,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 10,200,000 700,000 9,500,000 Carr Road Improvements 2,250,000 200,000 2,450,000 2,250,000 200,000 NESunset Boulevard (SR 900)corridor 1,200,000 1,000,000 ‘1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 28,800,000 1,200,000 27,600,000 Sunset Area Green Connections 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 22,200,000 22,200,000 Oakesdale Ave Swmlonster Rd SWI68th Ave 8 50,000 8,000,000 8,050,000 8,050,000 S 7th St -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd S 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 8,801,500 101,500 8,700,000 S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 3,275,000 3,275,000 Houser Way N-N 8th St to Lake Washington B 815,000 1,330,000 2,030,000 4,175,000 61,000 4,114,000 Lake Washington Loop Trail 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 14,556,000 1,096,000 13,460,000 Lake to Sound (L28)Trail 1,250,000 1,550,000 2,800,000 2,800,000 Walkway Program 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,350,000 ,800,000 550,000 Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacem Prog 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 660,000 660,000 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator 181,000 999,200 1,180,200 1,180,200 Bridge Inspection &Repair Program 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 530,000 180,000 350,000 Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 115,000 115,000 Intersection Safety &Mobility Program 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Traffic Safety Program 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 265,000 265,000 Preservation of Traffic Oper Device Program 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 372,000 372,000 ITS Program 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 180,000 Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 206,000 206,000 Project Development &Pre-Design Program 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 710,000 710,000 Arterial circulation Program 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 885,000 885,000 1%for the Arts Program 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 90,000 90,000 Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene 1,000,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 Sunset LaneINE 10th St Roadway Improvemen 400,000 3,965,000 4,365,000 400,000 3,965,000 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement 7 1,037,300 111,600 1,148,900 1,148,900 N27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair 355,220 38,254 393,474 393,474 Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 5 4,400,000 4,500,000 Total Sources 14 940 915 18 121 854 65 608 000 222 497 969 31 960 769 TMJIProjectOnlll 5-1 a Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 40 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Street Overlay Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Proj: 122108 Community Planning Area: N/A TIP No. 1 CONTACT: BiiiWressel 425.430.2280 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Annual program for repairing and resurfacing existing roadways, maintaining the City's Pavement The 2014 "Pavement Management Program State of the Streets Report" rated the Management System and providing data for deficiency ratings. Installation of ADA compliant curb ramps average Pavement Condition Index (PC I) as 72. A review of the report to assess the has been incorporated into the annual Street Overlay Program in accordance with federal requirements. needed funding will be conducted in 2015. A new source of funding will need to be This program funds overlays on neighborhood streets and collector streets. The Arterial Rehabilitation identified to accommodate any increase in expenditures. Program funds principal and minor arterials. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Asphalt concrete pavement (ACP) overlay and slurry seal of streets provide for improved driving surface This program allocates $1 OOK/yr for the overlay of alley ways. The alley ways funding for and are highly cost-effective ways of avoiding expensive repairs and reconstruction. The Pavement 2015 will be reserved to complete the alley way on the SW quadrant of S 2nd St and Main Management System and biennial survey of roadway conditions greatly improve the efficiency of the Ave S in 2016. Overlay Program. (Funded: 17207 007 !Unfunded: I 4549000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning ---PreliminarY Engineering __ 28,524 524 4,000 24,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) __ Construction 11,282,301 709,501 811,800 9,761,000 713,000 1,664,000 1,730,000 1,810,000 1,894,000 1,950,000 Construction Services 445,182 56,182 53,000 336,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 11,756,007 766,207 868,800 10,121,000 773,000 1,724,000 1,790,000 1,870,000 1,954,000 2,010,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax 5,450,000 760,000 640,000 4,050,000 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 690,000 700,000 Business License Fee 1,638,207 6,207 110,000 1,522,000 123,000 227,000 250,000 280,000 312,000 330,000 Pro~sed Fund Balance 118,800 118,800 --Grants In-Hand (:!) __ Grants In-Hand (2) ------------Mitigation In-Hand --------------Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) ------ --Undetermined 4,549,000 4,549,000 837,000 870,000 910,000 952 000 980,000 TOTAL SOURCES 11 756 007 766 207 868 800 10121 000 773000 1 724 000 1 790 000 1 870 000 1 954 000 2 010 000 0610112015 5 - 1 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Street Overlay Functional Classification:N/A Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122103 N/A TIP No.coNTAcT:BillWressel 425.430.2230 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Annual program for repairing and resurfacing existing roadways,maintaining the City's Pavement The 2014 "Pavement Management Program State of the Streets Report"rated the Management System and providing data for deficiency ratings.Installation of ADAcompliant curb ramps average Pavement Condition Index (PCI)as 72.A review ofthe report to assess the has been incorporated intothe annual Street Overlay Program in accordance withfederal requirements.needed funding willbe conducted in 2015.A new source of funding willneed to be This program funds overlays on neighborhood streets and collector streets.The Arterial Rehabilitation identified to accommodate any increase in expenditures. Program funds principal and minor arterials. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Asphalt concrete pavement (ACP)overlay and slurry seal of streets provide for improved driving surface This program allocates $100K/yr for the overlay of alley ways.The alley ways funding for and are highlycost-effective ways of avoiding expensive repairs and reconstruction.The Pavement 2015 willbe reserved to complete the alley way on the SW quadrant of S 2nd St and Main Management System and biennial survey of roadway conditions greatly improve the efficiency of the Ave S in 2016. Overlay Program. Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 Mm T Planning PreliminaryEngineering 28,524 24,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 R-O-W includes Admin) Construction 11,282,301 9,761,000 1,664,000 1,730,000 1,810,000 1,894,000 Construction Services 336,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 56,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES Vehicle Fuel Tax 4,050,000 650,000 660,000 670,000 680,000 Business License Fee 1,522,000 123,000 227,000 250,000 280,000 Proposed Fund Balance Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 4,549,000 837,000 870,000 TOTAL SOURCES 11 756 007 5 -1 First Draft DGIDIIZOIS 2:55PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 41 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Arterial Rehabilitation Program Functional Classification: Various Proj. Length: N/A Proj: 122186 Community Planning Area: N/A TIP No. 2 CONTACT: Bill Wressel 425.430.2280 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: This program provides for the rehabilitation of principal and minor arterial streets. Installation of ADA-Paving schedule: 2015: SW Grady Way; 2015 and 2016 moved for match on Duvall Ave compliant curb ramps has been incorporated into the annual Arterial Rehabilitation and Overlay NE; 2017: Renton Ave Ext (S 130th St to Taylor Ave NW); Benson Ad (1 06th Ave SE St to programs according to new federal requirements. S Puget Dr); 2018: Benson AdS (S Puget Dr to SEagle Ridge Dr); 2019: Benson AdS (S Eagle Ridge Dr to 1-405 bridge approach); 2020: N 4th St from Logan Ave N to Factory Ave N. This order may change depending on future ratings. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The Overlay Program (TIP #1) concentrates to a great degree on maintaining residential streets, where Funds for 2015 ($404,000), 2016 ($425,000) and portion of 2017 ($31 ,000) have been relatively small traffic volumes and less truck and bus traffic make standard asphalt overlays a long term moved to Duvall Ave NE (TIP #6), for local match for the preservation grant. A new source means of maintenance. Arterial streets can often deteriorate rather quickly and often require more costly of funding will need to be identified to accommodate any increase in expenditures. rehabilitation measures and/or costly temporary repairs to avoid more extensive deterioration. ]Funded: _1_3 432 298 !Unfunded: 12179 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 88,298 80,298 8,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) Construction 5,290,000 932,000 4,358,000 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 Construction Services 233,000 233,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 5,611,298 80,298 1,173,000 4,358,000 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 2,376,000 80,000 117,000 2,179,000 365,000 418,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 Pro~sed Fund Balance 366,298 298 366,000 Grants lh·Hand (STP·Preservatior 700,000 700,000 --Grants In-Hand (g) · Mitigation In-Hand WSDOT State (deducted from 9!! ---10,000 -10,000 Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) -- Undetermined 2 179,000 2,179,000 365,000 418,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 TOTAL SOURCES 5 611 298 80298 1173 000 2179 000 730 000 836 000 882 000 930000 980000 D&'0112015 2:56PM 5 - 2 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Arterial Rehabilitation Program Functional Classification:Various Proj.Length:N/A Proj:122186 Communi Plannin Area:N/A TIP No.2 CONTACT:Billwressel 425.430.2230 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This program provides for the rehabilitationof principal and minor arterial streets.Installation of ADA-Paving schedule:2015:SW Grady Way;2015 and 2016 moved for match on Duvall Ave compliant curb ramps has been incorporated intothe annual Arterial Rehabilitationand Overlay NE;2017:Renton Ave Ext (S 130th St to Taylor Ave NW);Benson Rd (106th Ave SE St to programs according to new federal requirements.8 Puget Dr);2018:Benson Rd S (S Puget Dr to S Eagle Ridge Dr);2019:Benson Rd S (8 Eagle Ridge Drto I-405 bridge approach);2020:N4th St from Logan Ave N to Factory Ave N.This order may change depending on future ratings. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The Overlay Program (TIP #1)concentrates to a great degree on maintaining residential streets,where Funds for 2015 ($404,000),2016 ($425,000)and portion of 2017 ($31,000)have been relatively small traffic volumes and less truck and bus traffic make standard asphalt overlays a long term moved to DuvallAve NE(TIP #6),for local match for the preservation grant.A new source means of maintenance.Arterialstreets can often deteriorate rather quicklyand often require more costly of funding willneed to be identified to accommodate any increase in expenditures. rehabilitation measures and/or costly temporary repairs to avoid more extensive deterioration. Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Pro -rammed 2017 2018 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering R-O-W includes Admin) Construction 4,358,000 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 5,811,298 80,298 1,173,000 4,358,000 730,000 836,000 882,000 930,000 980,000 T T Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 2,179,000 365,000 418,000 441,000 465,000 490,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants |'n-Hand (STP-Preservationi Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand WSDOT State deducted from gral Undetermined 2,179,000 365,000 441 .000 465,000 490,000 TOTAL SOURCES 730 000 882 000 930 000 980 mu lI6m1I20I5 2:56PMAnorlOJ_RdIIb 5 -2 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 42 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Logan Ave N Improvements Functional Classification: Principal Arterial Fund: 317 Proj. Length: 0.76 mi Proj: 122303 Community Planning Area: Citv Center TIP No. 3 CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Phase 1 (from Cedar River Bridge to N 6th st) includes reconstruction of the roadway pavement, new The City was awarded a STP grant in the amount of $951,000 for design in 2012. A TIB traffic signal and new curb, gutter, sidewalks, landscaped buffer, streetlights on the east side of Logan grant in the amount of $4,618,248 was awarded in 2013. A STP grant in the amount of Ave N. Phase 2 (N 6th St to Park Ave N) will add a northbound lane, new curb, gutter, sidewalks (on the $2,490,000 was awarded in 2014 for construction of Phase 1. Phase 2 is pending future east side), landscaped buffer, and a pedestrian/bicycle trail (west side), streetlights, pedestrian scale grant funding availability. illumination, crosswalks, pedestrians ramps, channelization. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The condition of the roadway pavement has deteriorated (due to increase in commuter and freight The design work for the bicycle crossing on Cedar River bridge has been moved to TIP 18 volume) to the extend that total replacement may be.needed. The increase in traffic and the new -Loop Trail. Transit Signal Priority (TSP) at Logan Ave with Airport Way has been RapidRide transit have warranted widening to add a northbound lane. Included with the improvements completed as part of the RapidRide implementation. Funding in 2015-2016 is for are urban roadway amenities to implement "Complete Streets" practice per City code. construction of Phase 1. Phase 2 from N 6th St to Park Ave is under project development and design. !Funded: 18136 893 Unfunded: 24 680000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 39,760 39,760 Preliminary Engineering 3,302,736 832,336 230,400 2,240,000 1,240,000 1,000,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 9,056,720 28,220 28,500 9,000,000 9,000,000 Construction 16,655,800 4,364,640 12,291,160 1,091,160 5,000,000 6,200,000 Construction Services 3,761,876 76 1,217,440 2,544,360 304,360 1,000,000 1,240,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 32,816,893 900,393 5,840,980 26,075,520 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax --Business License Fee 27,065 27,065 Fund Balance + Held reserve 30,524 20,111 2,554 7,859 7,859 Grants In-Hand (STP) 3,441,001 799,217 2,143,784 498,000 498,000 Grants In-Hand _@ ) --4,448,303 3,558,642 889,661 889,661 Mitigation In-Hand 200,000 54,000 --146,000 WSDOT State _(deducted from gra -10,000 ----10,000 Other In-Hand Other In-Hand -----Undetermined 24,680,000 24,680,000 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000 000 7,440,000 TOTAL SOURCES 32,816,893 900,393 5,840,980 26,075,520 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 0412712015 134PM 5 - 3 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Logan Ave N Improvements Functional Classification:Principal Arterial Fund:317 Proj.Length:0.76 mi Proj:122303 Communi Plannin Area:Ci Center TIP No.3 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Phase 1 (from Cedar River Bridge to N6th st)includes reconstruction of the roadway pavement,new The Citywas awarded a STP grant inthe amount of$951,000 for design in 2012.ATIB traffic signal and new curb,gutter,sidewalks,landscaped buffer,streetlights on the east side of Logan grant in the amount of $4,618,248 was awarded in2013.A STP grant in the amount of Ave N.Phase 2 (N 6th St to Park Ave N)willadd a northbound lane,new curb,gutter,sidewalks (on the $2,490,000 was awarded in 2014 for construction of Phase 1.Phase 2 is pending future east side),landscaped buffer,and a pedestrian/bicycle trail (west side),streetlights,pedestrian scale grant funding availability. illumination,crosswalks,pedestrians ramps,channelization. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The condition of the roadway pavement has deteriorated (due to increase in commuter and freight The design work for the bicycle crossing on Cedar River bridge has been moved to TIP 18 volume)to the extend that total replacement may be needed.The increase intraffic and the new -Loop Trail.Transit Signal Priority (TSP)at Logan Ave withAirportWay has been RapidRide transit have warranted widening to add a northbound lane.Includedwiththe improvements completed as part of the Flapid?ide implementation.Funding in2015-2016 is for are urban roadway amenities to implement "Complete Streets"practice per City code.construction of Phase 1.Phase 2 from N 6th St to Park Ave is under project development and design. 8 136 393 24 680000 Pro ect Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Programmed Spent Pre-2015 Total 2017 2018 201 9 2020 2021 Planning 39,760 39,760 Preliminary Engineering 3,302,736 832,336 2,240,000 1,240,000 1,000,000 Fi-O-W includes Admin 9,056,720 28,220 9,000,000 9,000,000 Construction 16,655,800 12,291,160 1,091,160 5,000,000 6,200,000 Construction Services 3,761,876 76 2,544,360 304,360 1,000,000 1,240,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 900,393 26,075,520 1,395,520 6,000,000 7,440,000 Business License Fee 27,065 Fund Balance +Held reserve 20,111 7,859 7,859 Grants In-Hand (E)799,217 498,000 498,000 Grants In-Hand TIB)889,661 889,661 Mitigation ln-Hand 54,000 WSDOT State deducted from gran Undetermined 24,680,000 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 TOTALSOURCES 26,075,520 1,395,520 1,240,000 10,000,000 6,000,000 7,440,000 04IZ7I20l5 I 34PMLoganFund 5 -3 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 43 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED SW 27th Street/Strander Boulevard Connection Functional Classification: Minor Arterial Proj. Length: 1.27 miles Proj: 122239, 122240 Communitv Planning Area: Valley TIP No. 4 CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: This project provides a critical four/five-lane arterial that will serve as a connector to West Valley Ph.1 Seg. 1 is complete. Grants include: TEA-21 funds of $745,563 (2003); various Highway (SA 181) and East Valley Road, as well as an arterial connector to SA 167 from the south. The discretionary totaling $1,677,185 (2005-2009); a $4.6M STP Regional; $7.75M from project will provide a grade-separated crossing at the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) and Burlington FMSIB; $4M (plus $123,766 for wetland acqusition) from Sound Transit and a $2.75M Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) railroad tracks. Bicycle and pedestrian connections will be provided to the from TIB. An interfund loan ($700K) was approved for the current phase. The loan Tukwila Station and the Interurban Trail. repayment is reflected in a separate TIP (Loan Repayment-TIP No. 4-A). Mitigation funds habe been allocated to this phase. !JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: A new east-west arterial roadway will connect the cities of Renton and Tukwila and provide significant Phase 1 -Seg 2a-2 lane roadway from Naches Ave SW to the Sounder Station, including congestion relief to existing arterials. The new road will provide access to the new Tukwila Station, a a BNSF bridge is completed. Project in close out. City of Tukwila has taken the lead for multi-modal center being developed by Sound Transit immediately north of the new alignment. By future phases. undercrossing the UPRR and BNSF railroads, the new arterial will provide significant benefits to both freight mobility and general motorists. r Funded :1 31126 5691 Unfunded :1 Profect Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 5,030,912 5,030,912 R-0-W (includes Admin) 3,842,563 3,842,563 Construction 16,692,572 16,142,572 550,000 Construction Services 2,551,079 2,401,079 150,000 Phase 1, Sea 1 desian/constr. 3,009,442 3,009,442 TOTAL EXPENSES 31,126,569 30,426,569 700,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax lnterfund Loan 700,000 700,000 Gen Fund & Prop.Fund BalancE 2,648,410 2,093,410 555,000 Grants In-Hand (State & Fed) 2,408,422 2,408,422 Grants In-Hand (FMSIB) 7,697,425 7,697,425 Mitigation In-Hand 852,500 707,500 145,000 Bonds 2,799,500 2,799,500 Other: Sound Transit + FRB 4,687,421 4,687,421 Grants In-Hand (STP Grant+ TIB) 7,346,536 7,346,536 City of Tukwila Reimb. 1,000,000 1,000,000 Sale of Prope~ (BNSF) 561,335 561,335 PW Utilites (Water & Surf Water) 425,020 425,020 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 31126 569 30 426 569 700 000 5-4A FINAL CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM —AMENDED SW 27th StreetlStrander Boulevard Connection Functional Classification:MinorArterial Proj.Length:1.27 miles Proj:122239,122240 Valle TIP NO.4 CONTACT:KeithWoolle 425.430.7318 .STATUS: This project provides a criticalfour/five-lane arterial that willserve as a connector to West Valley Ph.1 Seg.1 is complete.Grants include:TEA-21 funds of $745,563 (2003);various Highway (SH 181)and East Valley Road,as well as an arterial connector to SR 167 from the south.The discretionary totaling $1,677,185 (2005-2009);a $4.6M STP Flegional;$7.75M from project willprovide a grade—separated crossing at the Union Pacific Railroad (UPFlR)and Burlington FMSIB;$4M (plus $123,766 for wetland acqusition)from Sound Transit and a $2.75M Northern Santa Fe (BNSF)railroad tracks.Bicycle and pedestrian connections willbe provided to the from TIB.An interfund loan ($700K)was approved for the current phase.The loan Tukwila Station and the lnterurban Trail.repayment is reflected in a separate TIP (Loan Repayment -TIP No.4-A).Mitigationfunds habe been allocated to this phase. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: A new east-west arterial roadway willconnect the cities of Flenton and Tukwila and provide significant Phase 1 -Seg 2a -2 lane roadway from Naches Ave SW to the Sounder Station,including congestion relief to existing arterials.The new road willprovide access to the new TukwilaStation,a a BNSF bridge is completed.Project in close out.City of Tukwila has taken the lead for multi-modal center being developed by Sound Transit immediately north of the new alignment.By future phases. undercrossing the UPRR and BNSF railroads,the new arterial willprovide significant benefits to both freight mobilityand general motorists. 1?mEE j Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Preliminary Engineering 5,030,912 5,030,912 Fl-O-W includes Admin)3,842,563 3,842,563 Construction 16,692,572 16,142,572 Construction Services 2,401,079 Phase 1,Se 1 desin/constr.3,009,442 TOTAL EXPENSES 31,125,559 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax lntertund Loan 700,000 Gen Fund &Prop.Fund Balance 2,093,410 Grants ln-Hand State &Fed)2,408,422 Grants ln-Hand (FMSIB)7,697,425 Mitigation ln-Hand 707,500 Bonds 2,799,500 Other:Sound Transit +FRB 4,687,421 Grants ln-Hand STP Grant+TlB)_7,346,536 City of Tukwila Reimb.1,000,000 561,335 PW Utilites Water 8:Surf Waler)_425,020 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 31 126 569 — 5 -4A FINAL v-«ammo I.»run5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 44 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED SW 27th Street/Strander Boulevard Connection -Loan Repayment Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: Valley TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: ~his project will account for the SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection loan repayment. The loan was approved by Council in May 2011 and will be amortized over a 5-year period, at a 2.25% interest rate. The interest amount to be paid over the life of the loan is approximatly $48,000. CHANGES: 4-A Funded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 EXPENSES: Loan re~Y.!!)ent 748,360 448,770 149,590 150,000 150,000 Prelimina!)' Engineering R-0-W (includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Phase 1, Seg 1 design and con TOTAL EXPENSES 748,360 448,770 149,590 150,000 150,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 748,360 448,770 149,590 150,000 150,000 Gen Fund & ProQ.Fund BalancE Grants In-Hand (State & Fed) Grants In-Hand (FMSIB) Mitigation In-Hand Bonds Other. Sound Transit+ FRB Grants In-Hand (STP Grant) -Ci~ of Tukwila Reimb. Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 748,360 448,770 149,590 150,000 150,000 5-4A FINAL Proj: CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 7483601 Unfunded :1 2019 2020 2021 CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED SW 27th Street/Strander Boulevard Connection -Loan Repayment Functional Classification:N/A Pro].Length:N/A Proj: Communi Planning Area:Valley TIP No.4-A CONTACT:KeithWoolley 425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project willaccount for the SW 27th St/Strander Blvd Connection loan repayment.The loan was approved by Council in May2011 and willbe amortized over a 5-year period.at a 2.25%interest rate. The interest amount to be paid over the life of the loan is approximatly $48,000. CHANGES: Mimi!743 360 j Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program 2021SpentPre-2015 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 —— Loan repayment 448,770 150,000 150,000 Preliminary Engineering Fl-O-W includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Phase 1,S ' ' TOTAL EXPENSES 150,000 150,000 sounces OF FUNDS:— Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 150,000 Gen Fund &Prop.Fund Balance Grants In-Hand State &Fed Grants In-Hand FMSIB) 150,000 Mitigation In-Hand Bonds Othen Sound Transit +FHB Grants In-Hand(STP Grant) CityofTukwila Fteimb. Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 748,360 u-«um-:u t..n rm 5 -4A FINAL5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 45 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor Improvements Functional Classification: Principal Proj. Length: 2.2 mi Community Planning Area: Hiohlands & East Plateau TIP No. 5 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Proj: 122176 CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 This project involves a series of improvements in this corridor to improve traffic operations such as The estimated cost for all corridor improvements (from Sunset Blvd N to the east City rechannelization and traffic signal modifications, possible transit priority signal treatments and queue limits) is $46M. Phase 1 constructed a new signal and other improvements at NE 4th St ·umps. This project will seek to meet pedestrian, transit and bicycle needs. and Whitman Ave NE. The project received a grant from TIB for Phase 1. Programmed expenses (2018-2021) are placeholders for future phases. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This corridor has a strong potential for transit usage and is experiencing rapid residential and retail Future phases are dependent on the receipt of grants. growth. The NE 3rd/4th Corridor Study was adopted in May 2005. The study refined the corridor transportation needs and costs, including pedestrian, transit, bicycle improvements, as well as streetscape enhancement. Funded: 3 719,085 !Unfunded: 111 620000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 218,420 218,420 Preliminary Engineering 2,176,917 776,917 1,400,000 700,000 700,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 584,024 84,024 500,000 500,000 Construction 9,316,803 2,316,803 7,000,000 2,000,000 4,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Services 3,042,921 322,921 2,720,000 340,000 680,000 1,700,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 15,339,085 3,719,085 11,620,000 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax --Business License Fee 422,831 422,831 -----------ProJ)osed Fund Balance 1,024,433 1,024,433 -Grants In-Hand ~~-----1,495,542 1,495,542 Grants In-Hand (g) ____ ---Mitigation In-Hand 373,700 373,700 -------Other In-Hand (KC WD#90) 352,541 ---352,541 Other In-Hand (Franchise Reim 50,038 50,038 --- Grants ProJ)osed Other ProJ)osed --Undetermined 11,620,000 11,620,000 700,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 TOTAL SOURCES 15,339 085 . 3 719 085 11 620 000 700 000 3 540 000 4 680 000 2 700 000 NE3rd.,.NE4th 0412712015 l :WPM 5 - 5 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED NE 3rdlNE 4th Corridor Improvements Functional Classification:Principal Proj.Length:2.2 mi Proj:122176 Hihlands &East Plateau TIP No.5 CONTACT:KeithWoolle 425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project involves a series of improvements inthis corridor to improve traffic operations such as The estimated cost for all corridor improvements (from Sunset Blvd Nto the east City rechannelizatlon and traffic signal modifications,possible transit priority signal treatments and queue limits)is $46M.Phase 1 constructed a new signal and other improvements at NE 4th St ‘umps.This project willseek to meet pedestrian,transit and bicycle needs.and Whitman Ave NE.The project received a grant from TIBfor Phase 1.Programmed expenses (2018-2021)are placeholders for future phases. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This corridor has a strong potential for transit usage and is experiencing rapid residential and retail Future phases are dependent on the receipt of grants. growth.The NE 3rd/4th Corridor Study was adopted in May 2005.The study refined the corridor transportation needs and costs,including pedestrian,transit,bicycle improvements,as well as streetscape enhancement. 3 719 oas 11 620000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 218,420 218,420 I I Preliminary Engineering 2,176,917 776,917 1,400,000 700,000 700,000 Fl-O-W includes Admin)584,024 84,024 500,000 500,000 Construction 9,316,803 2,316,803 7,000,000 2,000,000 4,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Services 3,042,921 322,921 2,720,000 340,000 680,000 1,700,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 15,339,085 3,71 9,085 11,620,000 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 422,831 Proposed Fund Balance 1,024,433 Grants In-Hand(TIB)1,495,542 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand 373,700 Other In-Hand KC WD#90)352,541 Other In-Hand (Franchise Fleiml 50,038 Undetermined 3,540,000 4,680,000 2,700,000 TOTAL SOURCES 3 540 000 4 680 000 2 700 000 041272015 134PMNE3n.1_NEW: 5 -5 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 46 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Duvall Ave NE-NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Functional Classification: Minor Arterial Proj. Length: o.67 mi Community Planning Area: Highlands & East Plateau TIP No. 6 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122702 CONTACT: Doug Jacobson 425.430.7242 Widening roadway to five lanes, including new pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, storm Construction of the project pending outside funding. Project will enhance safety for drainage, channelization and bike lanes from NE 7th St to the intersection with Sunset Blvd NE. pedestrians, bicyclists and vehicular along this corridor. The cost estimate has been revised to City's complete Street standards. A STP Preservation grant in the amount of $1,237,000 was awarded in 2014 for the overlay of Duvall Ave NE from NE 4th St toNE 10th St. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Complete a missing link of S-lane roadway, bicycle lanes and sidewalks on Duvall Ave NE, from NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE. Condition of the existing roadway pavement requires road reconstruction. I Funded :1 2 097 0001 Unfunded :I 14165 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 20,000 20,000 10,000 10,000 PreliminarY Engineering __ 1,941,000 241,000 1,700,000 800,000 900,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 2,500,000 2,500,000 1,100,000 1,400,000 Construction 9,892,000 9,892,000 1,392,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 Construction Services 1,909,000 1,909,000 464,000 680,000 765,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 16,262,000 241,000 16,021,000 1,856,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 610,000 99,000 511,000 511,000 Fund Balance + Held reserve 250,000 250,000 250,000 Grants In-Hand (STP) 1,237,000 142,000 1,095,000 1,095,000 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (g) ____ Undetermined 14,165,000 14,165,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5,265,000 TOTAL SOURCES 16,262 000 241,000 16,021 000 1,856 000 1,910 000 2 310 000 4 680 000 5 265 000 ew.ll 7lh to St.met 0412712015 0412712015 13:34 5 - 6 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Duvall Ave NE -NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE Functional Classification:MinorArterial Fund:317 Pro].Length:0.67 mi Proj:122702 Area:Hihlands &East Plateau TIP No.6 CONTACT:Dou Jacobson 425.430.7242 .STATUS: Widening roadway to five lanes,including new pavement,curb,gutter,sidewalk,street lights,storm Construction of the project pending outside funding.Project willenhance safety for drainage,channelization and bike lanes from NE7th St to the intersection withSunset Blvd NE.pedestrians,bicyclists and vehicular along this corridor.The cost estimate has been revised to City's complete Street standards.A STP Preservation grant inthe amount of $1,237,000 was awarded in 2014 for the overlay of DuvallAve NEfrom NE 4th St to NE 10th St. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Complete a missing linkof 5-lane roadway,bicycle lanes and sidewalks on Duvall Ave NE,from NE 4th St to Sunset Blvd NE.Condition of the existing roadway pavement requires road reconstruction. ZIIIEEE 2097000 14165000 Project Totals Six Year Program ITEM 2017 2013 2019 2020 2021 Planning 20,000 10,000 10,000 Preliminary Engineering 1,700,000 800,000 900% R-O-W includes Admin)2,500,000 1,100,000 1,400,000 Construction 9,892,000 1,392,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 Construction Services 1,909,000 464,000 680,000 765,000 Post Construction Services 1.856.000 4.600.000 6.266.000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 511,000 511,000 Fund Balance +Held reserve 250,000 250,000 Grants In-Hand(STP)1,095,000 1,095,000 Undetermined 14,165,000 1,910,000 2,310,000 4,680,000 5.265.000 TOTAL SOURCES 1 910 000 2 310 000 4 680 000 5 265 000 Dung 1minsmug 0412712115 0412712015I:I::I4 5 -6 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 47 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Rainier Ave S/N Phase 4 -S 3rd Street to NW 3rd PI Functional Classification: Principal Proj. Length: 0.51 mi Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. 7 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Proj: 122195 CONTACT: Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 This is Phase 4 of the Rainier Ave Corridor Improvements, and will extend the improvements from S 3rd A STP grant in the amount of $2,600,000 was awarded in 2014 fordesign of Phase 4. St to NW 3rd Pl. Project elements include sidewalks widening with streetscaping, adding pedestrian-Design to begin in 2015. scale illumination, adding a pedestrian actuated traffic signal, new traffic signals, transit facility improvements, planted buffer strips and landscaped medians. ' JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Rainier Ave is a critical corridor in central Renton with existing operational problems and in need of infrastructure enhancements to provide greater ease of non-motorized and transit-based travel. It also provides improved access to the future Aerospace Training Center In Renton. Improvements will enhance traffic flow and reduce accidents. I Funded :I 3006000 Unfunded: 18 300 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning --Preliminary Engineering 3,006,000 1,200,000 --1,806,000 1,806,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 3,500,000 3,500,000 2,400,000 1,100,000 Construction 12,300,000 12,300,000 2,500,000 5.400,000 4.400,000 Construction Services 2,500,000 2,500,000 500,000 1,100,000 900,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 21,306,000 1,200,000 20,106,000 1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax ---Business License Fee 406,000 162,000 244,000 244,000 ProJlosed Fund Balance ------Grants In-Hand (STP) 2,600,000 1,038,000 1,562,000 1,562,000 -Grants In-Hand (2} ------Mitigation In-Hand ----- -------Other In-Hand W ------Other In-Hand (g) --Undetermined 18,300,000 18,300,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 TOTAL SOURCES 21,306,000 1,200,000 20,106,000 1,806,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 0412712015 1 34PI.I 5 - 7 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Rainier Ave SIN Phase 4 -S 3rd Street to NW 3rd Pl Functional Classification:Principal Proj.Length:0.51 mi Proj:122195 Community Planning Area:CityCenter TIP No.7 CONTACT:DerekAkesson 425.430.7337 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This is Phase 4 of the Rainier Ave Corridor Improvements,and willextend the improvements from S 3rd A STP grant in the amount of $2,600,000 was awarded in 2014 fordesign of Phase 4. St to NW3rd Pl.Project elements include sidewalks widening withstreetscaping,adding pedestrian-Design to begin in 2015. scale illumination,adding a pedestrian actuated traffic signal,new traffic signals,transit facility improvements,planted buffer strips and landscaped medians. \JUSTIFICATION:c|-|ANGEs; Rainier Ave is a criticalcorridor in central Renton withexisting operational problems and in need of infrastructure enhancements to provide greater ease of non-motorized and transit-based travel.Italso provides improved access to the future Aerospace Training Center inRenton.Improvements will enhance traffic flowand reduce accidents. Funded : Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Pro_gram ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 2017 2018 T TEXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 3,006,000 1,806,000 1,806,000 R-O—W(includes Admin)3,500,000 3,500,000 2,400,000 1,100,000 Construction 12,300,000 12,300,000 2,500,000 5,400,000 4,400,000 Construction Services 2,500,000 500,000 1,100,000 900,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 21,306,000 1,200,000 4.100.000 6.500.000 5.300.000 SOURCES OF FUNDS:—— Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 244,000 244,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (STP)1,562,000 1,562,000 Grants In-Hand (2) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 18,300,000 18,300,000 2,400,000 4,100,000 6,500,000 5,300,000 TOTAL sounces 21.aos.o0o 2.400.000 4.100.000 6.500.000 5.300.000 04lZ7I2DI5 I 34 PMRIiriorPh2 5 -7 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 48 of 247 Main Ave S/Downtown Circulation Project CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 SIX YEAR TIP Functional Classification: Proj. Length: Principal Fund: 317 N/A Proj: 122907 Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. 8 CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: The project provides traffic operation and circulation improvements and pedestrian enhancement on A feasibility study on the conversion of the downtown's one way couplets to two-way Main AveS and Bronson WayS. The improvements include providing a northbound lane in Main Ave streets was completed in 2012. The reconfiguration of Main AveS and Bronson WayS S and Bronson Way from S 3rd St to Mill Ave S, reconfigure the intersection of S 2nd Stand Main was awarded a $1,024,750 TIB grant in 2014. Future phases to be determined. Ave S, including a pedestrian plaza, and adds on-street parking. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The project creates an identity entrance to downtown area, while improving circulation, reducing traffic To reduce conflicts with construction of the Heritage Apartments at the SW corner of S speeds and enhancing pedestrian safety. 2nd St and Main Ave S, construction has been postponed and completion anticipated for 2016. Funded: 1 849 338 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 49,090 49,090 Preliminaty Engineering 248,498 498 248,000 R-0-W (!ncludes Admin) Construction 1,545,000 772,500 772,500 772,500 Construction Services 231,750 115,875 115,875 115,875 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 2,074,338 49,588 1,136,375 888,375 888,375 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 49,588 49,588 Pro(). Fund Bal. Grants In-Hand (!18} 1,024,750 512,375 512,375 512,375 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand-Metro Mitig. 500,000 124,000 376,000 376,000 Other In-Hand -S Renton Reserve 275,000 275,000 Other-General Fund Transfer 225,000 225,000 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 2,074 338 49588 1136 375 888 375 888375 SAIII'IklnPrcjecl 0412712015 I :WPIA 5 -8 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 SIX YEAR TIP Main Ave SlDowntown Circulation Project Functional Classification:Principal 317 Pro].Length:N/A :122907 Communi Plannin Area:Ci Center TIP No.8 CONTACT:'425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: The project provides traffic operation and circulation improvements and pedestrian enhancement on Afeasibility study on the conversion of the downtown's one waycouplets to two-way MainAve S and Bronson Way S.The improvements include providing a northbound lane in Main Ave streets was completed in2012.The reconfiguration of Main Ave S and Bronson Way S S and Bronson Way from S 3rd St to MillAve S,reconfigure the intersection of S 2nd St and Main was awarded a $1,024,750 TIBgrant in2014.Future phases to be determined. Ave 8,including a pedestrian plaza,and adds on-street parking. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The project creates an identity entrance to downtown area,while improving circulation,reducing traffic To reduce conflicts with construction of the Heritage Apartments at the SW corner of S speeds and enhancing pedestrian safety.2nd St and Main Ave S,construction has been postponed and completion anticipated for 2016. 1:112:21 1 849 333 T Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 l T T _j__j__S_____ Planning Preliminary Engineering Fl-O-W includes Admin) Construction 772,500 772,500 Construction Services 115,875 115,875 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 2.074.838 888.375 souncs or FUNDS:O O Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Prop.Fund Bal. Grants In-Hand(TIB) Grants In-Hand (2) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand -Metro Mitig.500,000 376,000 Other In-Hand -S Flenton Reserve 275,000 Other —General Fund Transfer 225,000 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 2 074 338 888 375 SRmtatPn1er.I 0412712015 I 34 PM 5 —8 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 49 of 247 Park Avenue North Extension Community Planning Area: City Center DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: 0.23 mi TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 9 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 The project will extend Park Ave N to the north of Logan Ave N, to provide access to Southport, PSE This is an economic development project that will likely be on hold until there is some property and The Boeing Company. Improvements include bicycle and pedestrian facilities, illumination, proposal by the property owners to develop the area north of Logan Ave N. landscaping. ~USTIFICATION: CHANGES: With the additional development growth in the North Renton area, which includes The Landing and the The project is estimated at $10M. Cost beyond 2021 not shown. Southport residential/hotel/office development, this project will construct improvements to extend Park Ave N. I Funded :1 I Unfunded :I 3,000,000 Proiect Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering __ 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 R-0-W {includes Admin) __ --1 ,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee ProQQsed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) ___ ·---Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (2) Other In-Hand (g) - ----Undetermined 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 TOTAL SOURCES 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 0412712015 134PM 5 - 9 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Park Avenue North Extension FunctionalClassification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:0.23 mi Proj: Community Planning Area:City Center TIP No.9 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: The project willextend Park Ave Nto the north of Logan Ave N,to provide access to Southport,PSE This is an economic development project that will likely be on hold until there is some property and The Boeing Company.Improvements include bicycle and pedestrian facilities,illumination,proposal by the property owners to develop the area north of Logan Ave N. landscaping. USTIFICATION:CHANGES: With the additional development growth in the North Renton area,which includes The Landing and the The project is estimated at $10M.Cost beyond 2021 not shown. Southpon residential/hotel/officedevelopment,this project willconstruct improvements to extend Park Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 ITEM Pro -rammed Spent Pre-2015 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 2,000,000 R-O-W includes Admin)1,000,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand(1) Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In~Hand(g) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 5 -9 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 50 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED 116th Ave SE Improvements Functional Classification: Minor arterial Fund: 317 Proj. Length: 2.5 mi Proj: 122117 Community Planning Area: Benson TIP No. 10 CONTACT: Bob Hanson 425.430.7223 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Widen roadway to provide a 3-lane roadway with bike lanes along 116th Ave SE and Edmonds Ave SE, Benson Hill Community Plan (adopted in 2013) recommended improvementsfor a first including new pavement, curb, gutter, sidewalk, street lights, traffic signals, storm drainage, phase, based on the neighborhood needs. The priority, cost and schedule for the phased channelization and landscaping from Puget Drive SE to south City limits. improvements will be determined based on available funding. The corridor improvements is estimated at $33M (plus $14M for right-of-way to meet the City's Complete Street standard). JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: 116th Ave SE is classified as a minor arterial. It has generally two lanes of traffic with left-turn lanes at Improvements from SE Petrovitsky Ad to SE 168th St will be part of Phase 1. signalized intersections and intermittent two-way-left-turn-lane south of SE 168th. Non-continuous Programmed funding shown (2018-2021) is for Phase 1 only. The project was awarded a segments of sidewalk exist along the roadway. Improvements will enhance vehicular, bicycle and $707,000 CMAQ grant for design and construction of the missing link sidewalks from SE pedestrian safety along this important north-south transportation corridor. Petrovitsky Ad to the Post Office. !Funded: 1818 000 Unfunded: 9 500 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminal)' Engineering 1,318,000 118,000 1,200,000 600,000 600,000 A-0-W (includes Admin) 2,800,000 2,800,000 1,000,000 1,800,000 Construction 5,282,000 5,282,000 582,000 2,000,000 2,700,000 Construction Services 918,000 918,000 118,000 340,000 460,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 10,318,000 118,000 10,200,000 700,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 111,000 16,000 95,000 95,000 Pro(.)osed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (CMAQ) 707,000 102,000 605,000 605,000 Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (g) ---- Undetermined 9,500,000 9,500,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 3,160,000 TOTAL SOURCES 10,318,000 118,000 10,200 000 700000 600 000 1 600 000 4140 000 3160 000 0412712015 1:J.4PM 5 - 1 0 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED 116th Ave SE Improvements Functional Classification:Minorarterial Fund:317 Pro].Length:2.5 mi Pro]:122117 Communi Plannin Area:Benson TIP No.10 CONTACT:Bob Hanson 425.430.7223 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Widen roadway to provide a 3-lane roadway with bike lanes along 116th Ave SE and Edmonds Ave SE,Benson HillCommunity Plan (adopted in 2013)recommended improvementsfor a first including new pavement,curb,gutter,sidewalk,street lights,traffic signals,storm drainage,phase,based on the neighborhood needs.The priority,cost and schedule for the phased channelization and landscaping from Puget Drive SE to south City limits.improvements willbe determined based on available funding.The corridor improvements is estimated at $33M (plus $14M for right-of-way to meet the City's Complete Street standard). JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: 116th Ave SE is classified as a minor arterial.Ithas generally two lanes of traffic with left-turn lanes at Improvements from SE Petrovitsky Rdto SE 168th St willbe part of Phase 1. signalized intersections and intermittent two-way-left-turn-lane south of SE 168th.Non-continuous Programmed funding shown (2018-2021)is for Phase 1 only.The project was awarded a segments of sidewalk exist along the roadway.Improvements willenhance vehicular,bicycle and $707,000 CMAQ grant for design and construction of the missing linksidewalks from SE pedestrian safety along this important north-south transportation corridor.Petrovitsky Rd to the Post Office. lim??l 818 000 EEEIEIEZ Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Spent Pre-201 5 2015 201 7 2018 2019 2020 Planning PreliminaryEngineering 1,200,000 600,000 600,000 H-O-W includes Admin)2,800,000 1,000,000 1,800,000 Construction 5,282,000 582,000 2,000,000 Construction Services 118,000 340,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance 605,000 MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 9,500,000 600,000 1,600,000 4,140,000 1 600 000 4 140 000 OJIZTIZJIE 1:34 PMI161?! 5 -10 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 51 of 247 Carr Road Improvements CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: Major Arterial Proj. Length: Fund: 317 Proj: 122920 Community Planning Area: Talbot & Benson TIP No. 11 CONTACT: Juliana Fries 425.430.7232 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: A corridor design report prepared by King County in 2003 identified the need for roadway improvements The City was awarded a $3,241 ,000 grant for signal timing along SW 43rd SVSE Carr from Benson Dr SE (1 oath Ave SE) to Talbot Ad S. Potential improvements vary from roadway Rd/SE 176th SVSE Petrovitsky Ad Corridor and widening of the SE Carr Ad/Benson Dr SE realignmenVwidening at several locations to address geometric deficiencies, widening to S-lane roadway (SA 515) intersection. These are Phase 1 improvements. Future roadway improvement (2 lanes westbound, 3 lanes eastbound), to a new 4-5 lane roadway, including bicycle lanes on new options include spot safety improvements, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, roadway alignment. The total project cost is estimated as $80M. widening and roadway on new alignment. JUSTIFICATION: Carr Road is classified as a principal arterial. It has four lanes of traffic with left-turn lanes at CHANGES: intersections. Improvements are necessary to enhance vehicle traffic capacity and safety for vehicles, Funding shown in 2016 is for completion of Phase 1. Funding shown in 2018 is for bicycles, and pedestrians on this major east-west transportation corridor. finalizing scope, cost and schedule for futures phases. Funded: 3 265 787 !Unfunded: 1200 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 200,000 200,000 200,000 Preliminary Engineering 395,787 65,787 80,000 250,000 250,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 755,000 5,000 ~.ooo 750,000 Construction 1,720,000 720,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Services 395,000 145,000 250,000 250,000 --Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 3,465,787 65,787 950,000 2,450,000 2,250,000 200,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -------Business License Fee ---ProJ)osed Fund Balance 4,787 ----4,787 4,787 Grants In-Hand (Federal Safety) 3,241,000 65,787 930,000 2,245,213 2,245,213 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand 30,000 30,000 WSDOT State (deducted from grant abov -10,000 -10,000 --Other In-Hand (1) --Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 200,000 200,000 200,000 TOTAL SOURCES 3,465,787 65,787 950,000 2,450,000 2,250,000 200,000 CW!Rd 04'2712015 134PM 5 -11 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Carr Road Improvements Functional Classification:Major Arterial Fund:317 Pro].Length:Proj:122920 community Planning Area:Talbot &Benson TIP No.11 CONTACT:Juliana Fries 425.430.7232 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: A corridor design report prepared by King County in2003 identified the need for roadway improvements The City was awarded a $3,241,000 grant for signal timing along SW 43rd St/SE Carr from Benson DrSE (108th Ave SE)to Talbot Rd S.Potential improvements vary from roadway Rd/SE 176th St/SE Petrovitsky Rd Corridor and widening of the SE Carr Fld/Benson Dr SE realignment/widening at several locations to address geometric deficiencies,widening to 5-lane roadway (SR 515)intersection.These are Phase 1 improvements.Future roadway improvement (2 lanes westbound,3 lanes eastbound),to a new 4-5 lane roadway,including bicycle lanes on new options include spot safety improvements,bicycle and pedestrian improvements,roadway alignment.The total project cost is estimated as $80M.widening and roadway on new alignment. JUSTIFICATION: Carr Road is classified as a principal arterial.It has four lanes of traffic withleft-turnlanes at CHANGES: intersections.Improvements are necessary to enhance vehicle traffic capacity and safety for vehicles,Funding Sn0Wn in 2015 I5I0?C0TnP|eti0nOfPhase 1-Funding Sn0Wn in 2013 ISf0" bicycles,and pedestrians on this major east-west transportation corridor.nnaliling 50099.Cost and Schedule I0?futures Phases- 3 265 787 EEIEIIEEEZ Pro'ect Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Pro -rammed 2017 2018 EXPENSES: Planning 200,000 Preliminary Engineering 250,000 250,000 Fl-O-W includes Admin)750,000 750,000 Construction 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction Services 250,000 250,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance 4,787 Grants In-Hand Federal Safety)_2,245,213 2,245,213 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation ln~Hand JWSDOTState(deducted fromgrant abov Undetermined 200,000 200,000 TOTAL SOURCES 2,450,000 200,000 Carr Flu OUZWMIS 134PM 5 -11 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 52 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900) Corridor Improvements Functional Classification: Principal Proj. Length: 3.0 mi Community Planning Area: City Center, Highlands & East Plateau TIP No. 12 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122902 CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 This project will seek to address pedestrian, transit and bicycle needs. This corridor needs a series of key The Sunset Area Planned Action EIS prepared in 2011 delineated transportation needs improvements In this corridor to improve traffic operations such as channelization, traffic signal along Sunset Blvd from N Park Dr to Monroe Ave NE (cost estimated at $30M). The modifications, signal treatments, possible queue jumps, access management through installation of project has received a STP/CMAQ grant in the amount of $1,313,935 for design. The medians. The corridor limits are from 1-405 on the west to the east City limits. project has been phased. Phase 1 is from Harrington Ave NE toNE 12th St. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This corridor has strong potential for non-motorized and transit usage. The Sunset area is experiencing 30% Design of the corridor improvements is underway. residential and retail growth. I Funded :I 2 6001911 Unfunded :1 27600 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 200,000 200,000 Preliminary Engineering 4,000,191 2,191 1,198,000 2,800,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 600,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 4,000,000 4,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction 19,000,000 19,000,000 5,000,000 7,000,000 7,000,000 Construction Services 3,000,000 3,000,000 800,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 30,200,191 202,191 1,198,000 28,800,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 182,224 1,062 181,162 Fund Balance+REET +Held resel'\l 914,032 366,000 . 548,032 548,032 Grants In-Hand (STP/CMAQ) 1,313,935 1,129 655,839 656,968 656,968 Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand WSDOT State (deducted from gra -10,000 -5,000 -5,000 -5,000 Other In-Hand (CED) 200,000 200,000 Other In-Hand -Held in reserve Grants ProQosed (STP) ___ Undetermined 27,600,000 ' 27,600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 TOTAL SOURCES 30,200,191 202,191 1,198,000 28,800,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 8,100,000 04127/2015 I :WPM 5 -12 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED NE Sunset Boulevard (SR 900)Corridor Improvements Functional Classification:Principal Fund:317 Pro].Length:3.0 mi Pro]:122902 Community Planning Area:Ci Center,Highlands &East Plateau TIP No.12 CONTACT:KeithWoolley 425.430.7318 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project willseek to address pedestrian,transit and bicycle needs.This corridor needs a series of key The Sunset Area Planned ActionEIS prepared in 2011 delineated transportation needs improvements in this corridor to improve traffic operations such as channelization,traffic signal along Sunset Blvd from N Park Dr to Monroe Ave NE (cost estimated at $30M).The modifications,signal treatments,possible queue jumps,access management through installation of project has received a STP/CMAQ grant in the amount of $1,313,935 for design.The medians.The corridor limits are from I-405 on the west to the east City limits.project has been phased.Phase 1 is from Harrington Ave NEto NE 12th St. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This corridor has strong potential for non-motorized and transit usage.The Sunset area is experiencing 30%Design of the corridor improvements is underway. residential and retail growth. Unfunded : Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 —EXPENSES:- Planning 2oo,ooo 2oo,ooo Preliminary Engineering 4,000,191 2,191 2,800,000 1,200,000 1,000,000 600,000 R-O-W (includes Admin)4,000,000 4,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction 19,000,000 19,000,000 5,000,000 7,000,000 Construction Services 3,000,000 800,000 1,100,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Fund Balance+FtEET+Held resent 548,032 548,032 Grants In-Hand STP/CMAQ)_656,968 656,968 Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand WSDOT State (deducted from gral -5,000 Other In-Hand (E)2oo,ooo Other In-Hand -Held in reserve Grants Proposed (STP) Undetermined 27,600,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 7,800,000 9,700,000 ToTAL sounces so.2oo.191 28.8oo.ooo Sumot BM:I)lI27I2DI5 134 PM 5 -12 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 53 of 247 Sunset Area Green Connections Community Planning Area: Highlands DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 13 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 This project will construct multi-modal improvements identified in the Sunset Area Community Planned The total cost of project is estimated at $22.2M. Schedule, estimates and selection of Action Study. Roadways will be widened/extended/realigned to provide for future traffic flows. Several streets to be improved to be determined. Significant cost participation will be required from residential streets will be developed as "green connections" improving pedestrian mobility and enhance development interests. the neighborhood. Roadways included are NE 10th St. NE Sunset Lane, Harrington Ave NE, NE 12th St, Edmonds Ave NE, Jefferson Ave NE, Kirkland Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Improvements to these streets are key to support the redevelopment of the Sunset Area Community in Surface Water is leading a first phase for this project. the Highlands area, bounded by NE 21st St on the north, Edmonds Ave NEon the west, NE 7th St on the south, and Monroe Ave NE on the east. The City in partnership with the Renton Housing Authority aspires to redevelop the Sunset Terrace public housing community and encourage private redelopment in the Planned Action Study area over a 20-year period. I Funded :I I Unfunded :1 22200000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 2,600,000 2,600,000 -- - 2,600,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 1,000,000 1,000,000 --1,000,000 Construction 16,000,000 16,000,000 9,200,000 6,800,000 --Construction Services 2,600,000 2,600,000 1,500,000 1,100,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 22,200,000 22,200,000 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -Business License Fee --- --Proposed Fund Balance ------Grants In-Hand (1) -------1----Grants In-Hand (2) -Mitigation In-Hand --- -Other In-Hand (CED) -Other In-Hand --- Undetermined 22,200,000 22,200,000 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 TOTAL SOURCES 22,200,000 22,200,000 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 ........... o.&m'/2015 1 :WPM 5 -13 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj: TIP No.13 CONTACT:Jim Seitz Sunset Area Green Connections 425.430.7245CommunityPlanningArea:Highlands STATUS:DESCRIPTION: This project willconstruct multi-modal improvements identified inthe Sunset Area Community Planned The total cost of project is estimated at $22.2M.Schedule,estimates and selection of Action Study.Roadways willbe widened/extended/reallgned to provide for future traffic flows.Several streets to be improved to be determined.Significant cost participation willbe required from residential streets willbe developed as "green connections"improving pedestrian mobilityand enhance development interests. the neighborhood.Roadways included are NE 10th St,NE Sunset Lane.Harrington Ave NE,NE 12th St, Edmonds Ave NE,Jefferson Ave NE.Kirkland Ave NE and Glennwood Ave NE. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Improvements to these streets are key to support the redevelopment of the Sunset Area Community in Surface Water is leading a first phase for this project. the Highlands area,bounded by NE 21st St on the north,Edmonds Ave NE on the west.NE 7th St on the south,and Monroe Ave NE on the east.The City in partnership withthe Fienton Housing Authority aspires to redevelop the Sunset Terrace public housing community and encourage private redelopment inthe Planned Action Study area over a 20-year period. Funded :Unfunded :22 200 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM __Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 §lxPE_NsEs=lj:E J__i anning Preliminary Engineering 2,600,000 2,600,000 2,600,000 Fl-O—W(includes Admin)1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Construction 16,000,000 16,000,000 9,200,000 6,800,000 Construction Services 2,600,000 2,600,000 1,500,000 1,100,000 Post Construction Services , TOTAL EXPENSES 22,200,000 I_— 3,600,000 10,700,000 7,900,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS:_____ Vehicle Fuel Tax ‘T Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants in-Hand (1) Grants In-Hand (2) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand (CED) Other In-Hand Undetennined 22,200,000 3,600,000 10,700.03, TOTAL SOURCES 22,200,000 3.600.000 10.700.000 s,,,,..3...,ouznams 1:4 PM 5 -13 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 54 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Oakesdale Ave SW/Monster Road SW/68th Ave S to SR 900 Functional Classification: Fund: 317 Proj. Length: 0.92 mi Proj: Community Planning Area: West Hill TIP No. 14 CONTACT: Bob Mahn 425.430.7322 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Widen existing roadway to four lanes plus two-way-left-tum-lane where needed and bike lanes. Realign A preliminary design study was completed in 1999. Scope, cost and implementation Beacon Coal Mine Road approach to intersection with the new Oakesdale Ave SW roadway. Includes schedule to be determined. The project cost is estimated at $32M, with the City's share new roadway, curbs, sidewalk, drainage, street lighting, traffic signals, channelization, retaining walls and estimated at $13M and King Co. at $19M. City's share is programmed in future years. widening the existing bridge. Phase 1 of improvements will address drainage problems between the Monster Ad Bridge and the City limits. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Will serve growing north-south traffic demand. Cost beyond 2021 not shown. lFunded: I !Unfunded: 18 050 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 50,000 50,000 ----·. 50,000 Preliminary Engineering 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 8,050,000 8,050,000 50,000 8,000,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) ----·-Grants In-Hand (1) Mitigation In-Hand -Other In-Hand (1) -Other In-Hand (1) Undetermined 8,050,000 8,050,000 50,000 8.000,000 TOTAL SOURCES 8 050 000 8 050 000 50000 8000000 _.., o.ti2712D15 134PM 5 -14 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Oakesdale Ave SWlMonster Road SW/58th Ave S to SR 900 Functional Classification:Fund:317 Pro].Length:0.92 mi Proj: TIP N0.14 CONTACT:Bob Mahn 425.430.7322WestHillPlanninArea:Communi DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Widen existing roadway to four lanes plus two-way-left-turn-lane where needed and bike lanes.Realign A preliminary design study was completed in 1999.Scope,cost and implementation Beacon Coal Mine Road approach to intersection with the new Oakesdale Ave SW roadway.Includes schedule to be determined.The project cost is estimated at $32M,with the City's share new roadway.curbs,sidewalk,drainage,street lighting,traffic signals.channelization,retaining walls and estimated at $13M and King Co.at $19M.City's share is programmed in future years. widening the existing bridge.Phase 1 of improvements willaddress drainage problems between the Monster Rd Bridge and the City limits. CHANGES: Cost beyond 2021 not shown. JUSTIFICATION: Willserve growing north-south traffic demand. IFunded:I [Unfunded:I8;050000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM _I_Programmed spent Pre-201 5 2015 Total 2016 2017 __2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 50,000 50,000 7 50,000 Preliminary Engineering 5,000,000 5,000,000 5,000,000 R-O-W (includes Admin)3,000,000 3,000,000 3,000,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services __I ITOTALEXPENSES8,050,000 8,050,000 50,000 8,000,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants ln-Hand (1) Grants ln-Hand (1) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (1) 8,050,000 8 050 000 8,050,000 8 O50 O00 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 04IZ7I2DI5 114PM 5 -14 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 55 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED South 7th Street-Rainier AveS to Talbot Road South Functional Classification: Proj. Length: 0.38 mi Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122151 15 CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 Widening the existing roadway to 3 lanes (2 lanes EB and 1 lane WB) and a separated multi-use trail. The S 7th St Project -Traffic Analysis Report provided alternatives for corridor Includes new curb, gutter, wider sidewalks, streetlighting, landscaping, channelization and upgrades to improvement options. The planning level cost estimate is $1OM. Phase 1 is underway. traffic signals. Phase 1 is the construction of a new eastbound right-turn lane at the intersection of S 7th Funding for Phase 1 is provided through a $500,000 STP grant and a $585,230 TIB grant. Stand Shattuck Ave S and a traffic signal at this location. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This segment of the S 7th St corridor connects Talbot Rd S (SR 515) with Rainier AveS (SR 167). This Construction of the traffic signal at S 7th Stand Shattuck Ave S to be completed in 2016. segment of S 7th St is part of a designated east-west pedlbike route through the City's commercial core All future phases of the corridor improvements are unfunded. and an important link between regional trails. The South Renton Neighborhood Study has identified S 7th St as needing streetscape improvements. Funded: 1 368,043 !Unfunded: 18700000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 32,270 32,270 ----Preliminary Engineering __ 1,490,726 ---207,966 82,760 1,200,000 200,000 700,000 300,000 --R-0-W (includes Admin) __ __ 1 ,730,007 8,807 21,200 1,700,000 700,000 1,000,000 Construction 5,814,000 732,600 5,081,400 81,400 5,000,000 Construction Services 1,001,040 180,940 820,100 20,100 800,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 10,068,043 249,043 1,017,500 8,801,500 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax --Business License Fee 69,682 28,267 41,415 ------Projlosed Fund Balance+Reserve 264,361 32,270 215,640 16,451 16,451 ------Grants In-Hand (STP) 500,000 62,751 393,524 43,725 43,725 Grants In-Hand ~)_ 485,000 71,755 371,921 41,325 41,325 Mitigation In-Hand 54,000 54,000 -----WSDOT State (deducted from gra -5,000 -5,000 Other (proP-OSed KC Metro) -----Other In-Hand (1) -- Undetermined 8,700,000 8,700,000 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 TOTAL SOURCES 10,068,043 249,043 1,017,500 8,801,500 101,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 5,800,000 S7thSt 0412712015 1J.4PM 5 -15 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED South 7th Street -Rainier Ave S to Talbot Road South Functional Classification:Fund:317 Pro].Length:0.38 mi Proj:122151 Communi Planning Area:City Center TIP No.15 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Widening the existing roadway to 3 lanes (2 lanes EB and 1 lane WB)and a separated multi-use trail.The S 7th St Project -Traffic Analysis Report provided alternatives for corridor Includes new curb,gutter,wider sidewalks,streetlighting,landscaping,channelization and upgrades to improvement options.The planning level cost estimate is $10M.Phase 1 is underway. traffic signals.Phase 1 is the construction of a new eastbound right—turnlane at the intersection of S 7th Funding for Phase 1 is provided through a $500,000 STP grant and a $585,230 TIB grant. St and Shattuck Ave S and a traffic signal at this location. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This segment of the S 7th St corridor connects Talbot Rd 8 (SR 515)with Rainier Ave S (SR 167).This Construction of the traffic signal at S 7th St and Shattuck Ave S to be completed in2016. segment of S 7th St is part of a designated east-west ped/bike route through the City's commercial core Allfuture phases of the corridor improvements are unfunded. and an important link between regional trails.The South Renton Neighborhood Study has identified S 7th St as needing streetscape improvements. 1368043 8700000ProectTotalsProgrammedPre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-201 5 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 Planning 32,270 Preliminary Engineering 207,966 1,200,000 200,000 700,000 300,000 R-O-W (includes Admin)8,807 1,700,000 700,000 1,000,000 Construction 5,081,400 Construction Services 820,100 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 69,682 Proposed Fund Ba|ance+Reserve 264,361 Grants In-Hand (STP Grants In-Hand (‘_l'_@) Mitigationln—Hand WSDOT State (deducted from gran Other (proposed KC Metro) Other In-Hand (1) Undetermined 8,700,000 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 TOTAL SOURCES 8,801,500 200,000 1,400,000 1,300,000 04/27/2315 I 14 PMS7!!!5| 5 -15 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 56 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Rainier Ave S Functional Classification: Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 16 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 This project will perform a comprehensive analysis of multi-modal transportation improvements, including The project will remove the islands at the intersections of S Grady Way with Lake AveS review of potential transit improvements along Grady Way, such as BAT lanes and traffic signal priority and Shattuck Ave S, to allow for a continuous eastbound lane from Rainier Ave S to Talbot (TSP). Rd S. Included are modifications to the traffic signal, new pedestrian crossings and channelization. The project is unfunded. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Removal of the obstructions and reconfiguration of the right turn lanes to eastbound through lanes will add much needed capacity to the S Grady Way corridor. !Funded: I !Unfunded: 13 275 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 500,000 500,000 500,000 R-0-W _(includes Admin) __ Construction 2,400,000 --2,400,000 1,100,000 1,300,000 Construction Services 375,000 375,000 175,000 200,000 --Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 3,275,000 3,275,000 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -------------Business License Fee -----Pro~osed Fund Balance ------Grants In-Hand (!) ----Grants In-Hand l!.L. --Mitigation In-Hand -- -Other (proposed KC Metro) Other In-Hand (!) __ --Undetermined 3,275,000 3,275,000 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 TOTAL SOURCES 3,275,000 3,275,000 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 GradyW~ 0412712015 5 -16 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED S Grady Way -Talbot Rd S to Flainier Ave S Functional Classification:Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Proj: TIP No.15 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7245Area:CityCenterCommunityPlannin- STATUS: The project willremove the islands at the intersections of S Grady Way with Lake Ave S and Shattuck Ave S,to allow for a continuous eastbound lane from Rainier Ave S to Talbot Rd 8.included are modifications to the traffic signal,new pedestrian crossings and channelization.The project is unfunded. DESCRIPTION: This project willperform a comprehensive analysis of mu|ti—moda|transportation improvements,including review of potential transit improvements along Grady Way,such as BAT lanes and traffic signal priority (TSP). CHANGES:JUSTIFICATION: Removal of the obstructions and reconfiguration of the right turn lanes to eastbound through lanes will add much needed capacity to the S Grady Way corridor. —275 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Pro -rammed Spent Pre-2015 _2015 2016 2017 2013 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering R-0-W includes Admin) 500,000 500,000 2,400,000 1,100,000 1,300,000 375,000 175,000 200,000 3,275,000 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 3,275,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Grants In-Hand (1) MitigationIn-Hand —— Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Other (proposed KC Metro) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 3,275,000 Proposed Fund Balance Other In-Hand (1) DVIWWIY Grants In-Hand(1) 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 500,000 1,275,000 1,500,000 D4l27l2Dt5 1:34PM 3.275.000 5 -16 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 57 of 247 Houser Way N - N 8th St to Lake Washington Blvd Community Planning Area: City Center DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 SIX YEAR TIP Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 17 CONTACT: Bob Mahn 425.430.7322 This project will widen and realign the existing one lane roadway to a two-lane roadway and includes A conceptual layout of the two-way approach to the intersection of Houser Way and Lake intersection improvements to convert Houser Way N to a two-way operation. Includes new roadway, WA Blvd has been completed. This project will coordinate with the Southport Development curbs, pedestrian-bicycle path, drainage, signals, lighting, signing and channelization. improvements to the Southport entrance at the Lake WA Blvd/Coulon Park intersection. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The City of Renton travel demand model predicts traffic volumes increasing significantly in the North Renton Area in the near future. One of the recommendations to improve northbound access to Lake Washington Blvd is to convert Houser Way N to a two-way operations, between N 8th Stand Lake Washington Blvd. !Funded: 161 000 Unfunded: 4114 000 Project Totals Pro_grammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning --Preliminary Engineering 650,000 650,000 650,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 165,000 165,000 ---165,000 ---Construction 2,900,000 --2,900,000 1,150,000 1,750,000 Construction Services 460,000 460,000 180,000 280,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 4,175,000 4,175,000 815,000 1,330,000 2,030,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 61,000 61,000 16,000 45,000 --------Proposed Fund Balance -------Grants In-Hand (1) ----Grants In-Hand (2) -----Mitigation In-Hand ---- -------Other In-Hand (1 ) ___ --------Other In-Hand (g) __ --- Undetermined --4-.114,000 ----4,114,000 815,000 1,314,000 1,985,000 - TOTAL SOURCES 4,175,000 4,175,000 815,000 1,330,000 2,030,000 0412712015 134PM 5 -17 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 SIX YEAR TIP Houser Way N -N 8th St to Lake Washington Blvd Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Proj: community Planning Area:City Center TIP No.17 CONTACT:Bob Mahn 425.430.7322 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project willwiden and realign the existing one lane roadway to a two-lane roadway and includes A conceptual layout of the two-way approach to the intersection of Houser Way and Lake intersection improvements to convert Houser Way N to a tvvo-wayoperation.Includes new roadway,WA Blvdhas been completed.This project willcoordinate with the Southport Development curbs,pedestrian-bicycle path,drainage,signals,lighting,signing and channelization.improvements to the Southport entrance at the Lake WA Blvd/Coulon Park intersection. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The City of Henton travel demand model predicts traffic volumes increasing significantly in the North Renton Area in the near future.One of the recommendations to improve northbound access to Lake Washington Blvdis to convert Houser Way N to a two—wayoperations,between N 8th St and Lake Washington Blvd. Unfunded :4 114 000 Project Totals Pro rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Program med 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 650,000 650,000 Fl-O-W(includes Admin)165,000 165,000 Construction 2,900,000 1,150,000 1,750,000 Construction Services 460,000 180,000 280,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 2.030.000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Other In-Hand (g) Undetermined 1,314,000 1,985,000 TOTAL SOURCES BIS 04l27I2Dl5 134PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 58 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Lake Washington Loop Trail Functional Classification: varies Fund: 317 Proj. Length: Proj: 122802 Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. 18 CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: The project will provide a shared use regional trail from the Cedar River Trail and extending to the north Cost estimate was updated to include right-of-way and retaining walls along Rainier Ave N. city limits along Airport Way and Rainier Ave N. Project elements include a 12-foot shared path A TPA grant in the amount of $346,000 was awarded in 2013. A STP/CMAQ Non- separated from the travel lanes by an 8-foot landscaped strip. motorized grant for right-of-way acquisition (2016) in the amount of $575,000 was awarded, with a required match of $95,000. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The project will separate pedestrians and bicyclists from the vehicular traffic, enhancing safety and This project is phased. Phase 3 is from Logan Ave N/Cedar River to Rainier Ave N. encouraging residents to use active transportation modes. Estimate for Ph 3 is $6.5M. Phase 4 is from Airport Way/Rainier Ave N intersection to north City limits, and is estimated at $8.5M. A grant in the amount of $426,000 from the Ped and Bike Program is pending legislators approval. I Funded :1 1,581,2541 umunaea :1 l ;,,4bU,UUU Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering __ 2,311,254 254 485,000 1,826,000 426,000 1,400,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) __ 670,000 -----670,000 670,000 Construction 9,650,000 9,650,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 2,650,000 Construction Services 2,410,000 2,410,000 750,000 250,000 750,000 660,000 Developer Reimbursement TOTAL EXPENSES 15,041,254 254 485,000 14,556,000 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 122,000 122,000 --Fund Balance + Held reserve 27,254 34 27,220 --Grants In-Hand TAP+STP) __ 921,000 220 345,780 575,000 575,000 Grants In-Hand ( Ped/Bike Progra 426,000 426,000 426,000 ------Mitigation ln-H_and WSDOT State _(deducted from gra -10,000 -10,000 Other In-Hand -Aii'J)ort Fund Tran 95,000 95,000 95,000 Other In-Hand --------- ------Undetermined 13,460,000 13,460,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 TOTAL SOURCES 15 041 254 254 485,000 14,556,000 1,096,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1400000 3 750000 3 310000 0412712015 1 :WPM 5 -18 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Lake Washington Loop Trail Functional Classification:varies Fund:317 Pro].Length:Proj:122802 TIP No.18 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: The project willprovide a shared use regional trail from the Cedar River Trail and extending to the north Cost estimate was updated to include right-of-way and retaining walls along Rainier Ave N. city limitsalong Airport Way and Rainier Ave N.Project elements include a 12-foot shared path A TPA grant in the amount of $846,000 was awarded in 2013.ASTP/CMAQ Non- separated from the travel lanes by an 8-foot landscaped strip.motorized grant for right-of-way acquisition (2016)in the amount of $575,000 was awarded,with a required match of $95,000. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The project willseparate pedestrians and bicyclists from the vehicular traffic,enhancing safety and This project is phased.Phase 3 is from Logan Ave N/Cedar River to Rainier Ave N. encouraging residents to use active transportation modes.Estimate for Ph 3 is $6.5M.Phase 4 is from Airport Way/Rainier Ave N intersection to north City limits,and is estimated at $8.5M.A grant in the amount of $426,000 from the Ped and Bike Program is pending legislators approval. Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program 2019 2020 2021Programmed201620172018 EXPENSES:TC Planning PreliminaryEngineering 254 485,000 1,826,000 426,000 1,400,000 R-O—W(includes Admin)670,000 670,000 Construction 9,650,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 2,650,000 Construction Services 2,410,000 750,000 250,000 750,000 660,000 Develoer Reimbursement TOTAL EXPENSES 15,041,254 14,556,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 —SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Fund Balance +Held reserve Grants In-Hand TAP+STP)575,000 575,000 Grants In-Hand (Ped/Bike Pr0gra_r 426,000 426,000 MitigationIn-Hand WSDOT State deducted from gran Other In-Hand -Airport Fund Trans 95,000 95,000 Other In-Hand - Undetermined 13,460,000 3,750,000 1,250,000 1,400,000 3,750,000 3,310,000 TOTAL SOURCES 15 041 254 254 485 000 14 556 000 3 750 000 1 250 000 1 400 000 3 750 000 3 310 000 IMIZTIZDIS 134 PM-Guam AveN 5 -18 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 59 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail Functional Classification: N/A Fund: 317 Proj. Length: N/A Proj: 122903 Community Planning Area: City Center & Valley TIP No. 19 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: The Lake to Sound (L2S) Trail is a joint partnership between the cities of Renton, SeaTac, Tukwila, This project received a CMAQ grant in the amount of $800,125 for design of Phases: A - Burien and Des Moines, in coordination with King County. The 17-mile L2S Trail will provide an east-Naches Ave SW (Renton) to Fort Dent Park (Tukwila), and B -Des Moines Memorial west connection between the shoreline of Lake Washington (Renton) and the shoreline of Puget Sound Drive S (SeaTac and Burien). A CMAQ grant for construction of Phase A, in the amount (Des Moines). of $950,000 was awarded in 2014. No City match is required. King County is leading the design. !JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Phase A will connect Fort Dent (Tukwila) to the larger system of regional trails in South King County, Design of the Fort Dent Park Connection is 80% complete. Completion of design for including the Green River Trail, the Interurban Trail and the Cedar River Trail. Phase A goes from Phase A is anticipated in the Summer of 2015. Construction of Phase A estimated at Naches Ave SW (Renton) to Fort Dent Park (Tukwila). Phase A will provide a 12-foot wide asphalt paved $2.8M. Construction will begin in Spring of 2016. multi-use trail, with 2-foot gravel shoulders. !Funded: 13 710000 !Unfunded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning ---Preliminary Engineering 800,000 800,000 -----------------R-0-W (includes Admin) 110,000 110,000 ---Construction 2,240,000 --2-,240,000 1,000,000 1,240,000 Construction Services 560,000 560,000 250,000 310,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 3,710,000 910,000 2,800,000 1,250,000 1,550,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -----Business License Fee -----Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) --Grants In-Hand (2) ----------Mitigation In-Hand -- Other (KC + CMAQ grant) 3,710,000 910,000 2,800,000 1,250,000 1,550,000 Other In-Hand -- Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 3,710,000 910,000 2,800,000 1,250,000 1,550,000 0412712015 13o4PM 5 -19 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Lake 110S0‘-Ind (I-25)Trail Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Proj:122903 Communi Planning Area:CityCenter &Valley TIP No.19 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: The Lake to Sound (L2S)Trail is a joint partnership between the cities of Renton,SeaTac,Tukwila,This project received a CMAQ grant in the amount of $800,125 for design of Phases:A - Burien and Des Moines,in coordination with KingCounty.The 17-mile L28 Trail willprovide an east-Naches Ave SW (Renton)to Fort Dent Park (Tukwila),and B —Des Moines Memorial ''Drive S (SeaTac and Burien).A CMAQ grant for construction of Phase A,in the amount of $950,000 was awarded in2014.No City match is required.KingCounty is leading the design. USTIFICATION:CHANGES: Phase A willconnect Fort Dent (Tukwila)to the larger system of regional trails in South King County,Design of the Fort Dent Park Connection is 80%complete.Completion of design for including the Green River Trail,the Interurban Trail and the Cedar RiverTrail.Phase A goes from Phase A is anticipated inthe Summer of 2015.Construction of Phase A estimated at Naches Ave SW (Fienton)to Fort Dent Park (Tukwila).Phase A willprovide a 12-foot wide asphalt paved $2.8M.Construction willbegin in Spring of 2016. multi-use trail,with2-foot gravel shoulders. 3710000 — Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed spent Pre-2015 2015 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 800,000 R-O-W (includes Admin)110,000 Construction 2,240,000 1,000,000 1,240,000 Construction Services 560,000 250,000 310,000 Post Construction Services Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Mitigation ln-Hand Other KC+CMAQ grant)2,800,000 1,250,000 1,550,000 Other In-Hand Undetermined TOTAL souncss 3.710.000 5 -19 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 60 of 247 Walkway Program Community Planning Area: Citywide DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 120009 20 CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 This program provides for the design and construction of non-motorized transportation facilities for The Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study was completed in 2009 and is being used to pedestrians. Projects are identified and prioritized using criteria from the Comprehensive Citywide select projects that move into the design and construction phases. Walkway Study, Council direction, and through coordination with the City's Neighborhood Program. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Providing safe and convenient non-motorized facilities is an integral part of a complete transportation Partial funding from 2015 and 2016 has been tranfered from this program to the 116th Ave network. Specific improvements will respond to the needs of school children, the aged and persons with SE (TIP# 9) sidewalk project to match a federal grant. disabilities, and support increased use of transit. Funded: 924 000 !Unfunded: 1550 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 25,000 ---25,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Preliminary Engineering 165,000 -------20,000 145,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 R-0-W @eludes Admin) Construction 1,150,000 90,000 1,060,000 60,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 Construction Services ---134,000 14,000 120,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,474,000 124,000 1,350,000 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 924,000 124,000 800,000 100,000 --140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 Pror>osed Fund Balance ----Grants In-Hand (!) __ -------Grants In-Hand (2) ---Mitigation (sidewalk fee-in-lieu) ----Other In-Hand (!) __ --Other In-Hand (g)_ ---Undetermined 550,000 550,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 TOTAL SOURCES 1,474,000 124,000 1,350,000 100,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 0412712015 134PM 5 -20 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED WBIICWBVP|'O9|'am Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:120009 Community Planning Area:Citywide TIP No.20 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This program provides for the design and construction of non—motorizedtransportation facilities for The Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study was completed in 2009 and is being used to pedestrians.Projects are identified and prioritized using criteria from the Comprehensive Citywide select projects that move into the design and construction phases. Walkway Study,Council direction,and through coordination with the City's Neighborhood Program. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Providing safe and convenient non—motorizedfacilities is an integral part of a complete transportation Partial funding from 2015 and 2016 has been tranfered from this program to the 116th Ave network.Specific improvements willrespond to the needs of school children,the aged and persons with SE (TIP #9)sidewalk project to match a federal grant. disabilities,and support increased use of transit. limEE§924 000 IIIIIEIEIEZ 55o ooo Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 —EXPENSES: Planning 25,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Preliminary Engineering 145,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 R-O-W includes Admin) Construction 1,060,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 ''120,000 2o,g)g 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 800,000 100,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 140,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand(1) Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation(sidewalk fee-in-lieu) Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (g) Undetermined 550,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 110,000 TOTAL SOURCES 1,350,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 04l27I2015 134PMWlliwry 5 -20 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 61 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacement Program Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: Citywide TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Pro]: 122801 21 CONTACT: BiiiWressel 425.430.2280 This program provides for the replacement of existing curb and gutter, sidewalks, and curb ramps where The 2015 program will continue work in the Maplewood Glen Neighborhood and will start such facilities have deteriorated or have been damaged. work in the Highlands (Sunset Area) in partnership with Community and Economic Development and Community Service Departments. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This program will address deficiencies and provide safe and convenient non-motorized facilities for The program is scaleable to funding availability. Ideally $250K would be allocated for this pedestrians in neighborhoods with damaged or deteriorated curb and gutter, sidewalks, and curb ramps. program. There are some places where curb ramps do not exist or are not to current ADA standards and they will be upgraded through this program. Funded: 1 038 0001 Unfunded :I Project Totals Pro_grammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning -Preliminary Engineering ---10,000 5,000 -5,000 5,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) --Construction 990,000 340,000 650,000 90,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 -Construction Services 38,000 -33,000 5,000 5,000 --Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,038,000 378,000 660,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 760,000 100,000 660,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 100,000 --Proposed Fund Balance 278,000 --278,000 --Grants In-Hand (1) --Grants In-Hand (2) ---------Mitigation In-Hand ------- ------------Other In-Hand (1) ----------Other In-Hand (2) __ ----------------- --------Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 1 038 000 378 000 660000 100000 100000 100 000 130000 130000 100000 -Aohab 0412712015 134PM 5 -21 First Draft GTYOFRENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION EH6-2021TRANSPORTAWONIMPROVEMENTPROGRAM-AMENDED Sidewalk Rehabilitation and Replacement Program Functionan Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122501 communi Plannin Area:'‘TIP No.21 CONTACT:Billwressel 425.430.2230 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This program provides for the replacement of existing curb and gutter,sidewalks,and curb ramps where The 2015 program willcontinue work in the Maplewood Glen Neighborhood and willstart such facilities have deteriorated or have been damaged.work inthe Highlands (Sunset Area)in partnership withCommunity and Economic Development and Community Service Departments. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This program willaddress deficiencies and provide safe and convenient non-motorized facilities for The program is scaleable to funding availability.Ideally $250K would be allocated for this pedestrians inneighborhoods withdamaged or deteriorated curb and gutter,sidewalks,and curb ramps.program. There are some places where curb ramps do not exist or are not to current ADAstandards and they will Six-Year Program ITEM Total EXPENSES: Planning i I Preliminary Engineering 5,000 FI-O-W(includes Admin) Construction 650,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 130,000 Construction Services 5,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 660,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 660,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 130,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES M1 ??uh 04I27I2015 134 PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 62 of 247 Maple Valley Highway Attenuator Community Planning Area: Cedar River DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: Princiapl Arterial Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. 22 STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 This project will remove an existing concrete barrier end treatment located eastbound (east of the Riviera The design report is complete and was funded by the Roadway Safety and Guardrail Apartments). A new concrete barrier will be extended westerly approximately 400 feet and a new impact Program (TIP# 24). Final design and construction pending funding availability. attenuator will be installed at the end of the new concrete barrier. The project will also provide a 2-foot wide shoulder along SR-169 between the outside through lane and the face of the barrier. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) is a major arterial carrying 43,100 vehicles per day. This project will improve safety for eastbound traffic on Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) at this location, which has been the site to numerous collision impacts. !Funded: I !Unfunded: 11180200 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning --Preliminary Engineering _ 156,000 156,000 156,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) -85,000 ---85,000 25,000 60,000 ---Construction 782,700 782,700 782,700 ---Construction Services 156,500 156,500 156,500 ---Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,180,200 1,180,200 181,000 999,200 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee -Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (!) __ -----Grants In-Hand (g) --------Mitigation In-Hand ---------- -----------Other In-Hand (1) ----Other In-Hand (2) ----- Undetermined 1,180,200 1,180,200 181,000 999,200 TOTAL SOURCES 1,180,200 1,180,200 181,000 999,200 ._ .. LAnding (W27/2015 1:34PM 5 -22 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Maple Valley Highway Attenuator Functional Classification:Princiapl Arterial Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Proj: Community Planning Area:Cedar Fiiver TIP No.22 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project willremove an existing concrete barrier end treatment located eastbound (east of the Riviera The design report is complete and was funded by the Roadway Safety and Guardrail Apartments).A new concrete barrier willbe extended westerly approximately 400 feet and a new impact Program (TIP #24).Final design and construction pending funding availability. attenuator willbe installed at the end of the new concrete barrier.The project willalso provide a 2-foot wide shoulder along SR-169 between the outside through lane and the face of the barrier. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Maple Valley Highway (SR 169)is a major arterial carrying 43,100 vehicles per day.This project will Improve safety for eastbound trafficon Maple Valley Highway (SR 169)at this location,which has been the site to numerous collision impacts. Unfunded : Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 2017 2018m— Planning 156,000 156,000 85.000 25.000 60,000 782,700 782,700 156,500 156,500 1,180 200 999,200 Preliminary Engineering Fl-O-W(includes Admin Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,180,200 SOl_lI'-‘ICEOFFUNDS: — —. _—' Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants |n—Hand (g) MitigationIn-Hand Undetermined 1 180,200 999,200 1,180,200 999,200TOTALSOURCES H?hidsloludrla 04lZ7I20l5 I:J4 PM 5 -22 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 63 of 247 Bridge Inspection & Repair Program Community Planning Area: Citywide DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 120106 23 CONTACT: Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 Inspect all roadway bridges owned by the City every two years to determine bridge sufficiency and load Biennial bridge inspections will occur in 2015. A few bridges have annual inspections. ratings, and identify any seismic retrofit needed. Undertake minor repairs and preventative maintenance as needed. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Inspection program must be done for safety and funding purposes and as part of WSBIS Program to Funds shown under construction are for minor repairs to bridge structures. determine structural deficiencies, physical deterioration, or functional obsolescence and to qualify for federal bridge replacement grant funding. Repair funding is provided to accomplish lower cost improvements, identified through the inspection program, that will increase the safety and extend the longevity of the structures. I Funded: 1427 282 !Unfunded: 1350000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering ___ ___ 207,282 47,282 100,000 60,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) Construction 315,000 40,000 275,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 Construction Services Post Construction Services/Oth 215,000 20,000 195,000 20,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 737,282 47,282 160,000 530,000 30,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 205,000 25,000 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Pro~osed Fund Balance 222,282 47,282 175,000 --Grants In-Hand (FEMA) __ ---Grants In-Hand (State Share) Mitigation In-Hand other In-Hand Other In-Hand - Undetermined 350,000 350,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 70,000 TOTAL SOURCES 777 282 47,282 200000 530000 30000 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000 ...... __ 0412712015 5 -23 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Bridge Inspection &Repair Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:120106 TIP N0.23 CONTACT:DerekAkesson 425.430.7337 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Inspect all roadway bridges owned by the City every two years to determine bridge sufficiency and load Biennial bridge inspections willoccur in2015.A few bridges have annual inspections. ratings,and identify any seismic retrofit needed.Undertake minor repairs and preventative maintenance as needed. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Inspection program must be done for safety and funding purposes and as part of WSBIS Program to Funds shown under construction are for minor repairs to bridge structures. determine structural deficiencies,physical deterioration,or functional obsolescence and to qualify for federal bridge replacement grant funding.Repairfunding is provided to accomplish lower cost improvements,identified through the inspection program,that willincrease the safety and extend the longevity of the structures. E50151 427 202 Unfunded :350,000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Prorammed Spent in 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 T __?_jT__m T Planning Preliminary Engineering 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 Fl-O—Wincludes Admin) 275,000 55.000 55,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 Post Construction Services/Oth 195,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 TOTAL EXPENSES 737.282 100.000 100,000 100,000 100,000 100,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS:O M Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand FEMA Grants In-Hand State Share) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand Other In-Hand Undetermined 350,000 BIid9a_ImpcI:t 04/27/2015 1 34 PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 64 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: Citywide TIP No. 24 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: This program will provide lower cost guardrail improvements each year and improve the safety of the roadside environment. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This program will implement roadside safety improvements including barrier systems and hazardous object removal. !Funded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 EXPENSES: Planning -Preliminary Engineering 23,632 2,632 3,000 -18,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) ---Construction 95,000 10,000 85,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 -------Construction Services 14,000 2,000 12,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 ---Post Construction Services/Oth TOTAL EXPENSES 132,632 2,632 15,000 115,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 130,000 15,000 115,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 ---Proposed Fund Balance 2,632 2,632 Grants In-Hand (1) ----Grants In-Hand (2) ------Mitigation In-Hand -------- -------------Other In-Hand ------------Other In-Hand --------------Grants Proposed ---------Other PrOQosed ---Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 132,632 2,632 15,000 115,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 5 -24 First Draft Fund: 317 Proj: 120110 CONTACT: Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 1132 632 Unfunded: 2019 2020 2021 3,000 3,000_ 3,000 15,000 20,000 20,000 2,000 2,000 2,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 20,000 25,000 25,000 -- ------- ----- 20,000 25,000 25,000 0412712015 1 34PM CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM ~AMENDED Functional Classification:N/A Proj.Length:N/A TIP No. Roadway Safety and Guardrail Program Community Planning Area:Citywide 24 .STATUS: his program willprovide lower cost guardrail improvements each year and improve the safety of the roadside environment. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This program willimplement roadside safety improvements including barrier systems and hazardous object removal. Six-Year Program 201 8 Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Spent in 2014 2015 Project Totals Programmed 2017 Fund: Proj: CONTACT:Derek Akesson Planning Preliminary Engineering R-O-W (includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services/Oth TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 132,632 5 -24 First Draft 317 1201 10 425.430.7337 0027/213155c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 65 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Intersection Safety & Mobility Program Functional Classification: N/A Fund: 317 Proj. Length: N/A Proj: 122601 Community Planning Area: N/A TIP No. 25 CONTACT: Chris Barnes 425.430.7220 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: This program will install new traffic signals or make improvements to existing signals identified by the The Transportation Systems' Traffic Signal Priority List is determined by citizen concerns, Transportation Systems' Traffic Signal Priority List. intersection safety, mobility needs, and intersections that meet MUTCD traffic signal warrants. Traffic signals high on the warrant priority list include SW 41st St & Oakesdale Ave SW, SE Carr Road & 103rd Ave SE, and SW 34th St & Lind Ave SW. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Historically, one traffic signal is designed and constructed every two years to meet safety and mobility $180,000 of the 2015 budget was reallocated for match to grants awarded in 2014. A needs. This program budgets for projects needed to meet increasing demand, and the need for traffic signal at 156th Ave SE and SE 142nd PI will be installed, as an interum solution, signalized traffic control. Elements used to prioritize project intersections may include vehicular and will be funded via transportation general fund. approach volumes, accident analysis, signal-warrant analysis, and pedestrian volume. (Funded: 11 643 855 JUnfunded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering ___ --289,376 3,376 22,000 264,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) 22,705 22,705 Construction 1,166,775 47,775 39,000 1,080,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 Construction Services 165,000 9,000 156,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,643,855 73,855 70,000 1,500,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 1,643,855 73,855 _____lQ,OOO -1,500,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Pro~osed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) --Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand Other In-Hand Grants Pro~osed Other Proposed Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 1 643 855 73,855 70000 1 500,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250 000 250 000 25Q,OOO 051'0112015 5 -25 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Intersection Safety &Mobility Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122601 Communi Plannin Area:N/A TIP No.25 CONTACT:ChrisBarnes 425.430.7220 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This program willinstall new traffic signals or make improvements to existing signals identified by the The Transportation Systems‘Traffic Signal Priority List is determined by citizen concerns, Transportation Systems‘Traffic Signal PriorityList.intersection safety,mobilityneeds,and intersections that meet MUTCD traffic signal warrants.Traffic signals high on the warrant priority list include SW 41st St 8.Oakesdale Ave SW,SE Carr Road &103rd Ave SE,and SW 34th St 8:LindAve SW. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Historically,one traffic signal is designed and constructed every two years to meet safety and mobility $180,000 of the 2015 budget was reallocated for match to grants awarded in 2014.A needs.This program budgets for projects needed to meet increasing demand,and the need for traffic signal at 156th Ave SE and SE 142nd Pl willbe installed,as an interum solution, signalized traffic control.Elements used to prioritize project intersections may include vehicular and willbe funded via transportation general fund. approach volumes,accident analysis,signal-warrant analysis,and pedestrian volume. 1 643 855 — Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Prorarnmed 2016 2017 2018 2019 _2020 2021 —EXPENSES:W Planning Preliminary Engineering 264,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 44,000 Fl-O—W(includes Admin) Construction 1,080,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 180,000 Construction Services 156,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 26,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 70,000 1,500,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 250,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) Grants ln—Hand(g) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand Other In-Hand Grants Proposed Other Proposed Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 1 643 855 lnuasatcty ?ilmli 255 PM 5 -25 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 66 of 247 Traffic Safety Program Communi!Y Planning Area: Citywide DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122115 26 CONTACT: Eric Cutshall 425.430.7423 This ongoing yearly program provides funding for special small-scale traffic safety improvements that are This program installs traffic signal uninterruptable power supply/battery backup systems identified and require materials, labor or equipment beyond the normal scope of City maintenance (UPS/BBS) at critical intersections, pending sufficient funding. Also included in this activities. This program includes providing materials for railroad crossing upgrades and converting program The City was awarded a $300,000 Safety grant for a HAWK signal at Duvall Ave school zone signs to electronic operation. NE and NE 12th Stand pedestrian countdown signals at various intersections. Completion of these improvements anticipated for summer 2015. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Historically, this level of traffic safety improvements are required on an annual basis. This program budgets for safety projects to address these needs. Projects are typically identified through citizen concerns, analysis of accident records or observation by City Traffic Operations and Maintenance personnel. The Traffic Operations Section identifies and prioritizes locations. !Funded: 1774 893 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning PreliminarY Engineering 67,863 38,863 5,000 24,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 4,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) Construction 622,505 80,505 319,000 223,000 33,000 38,000 38,000 38,000 38,000 38,000 Construction Services 84,525 18,525 48,000 18,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES n4,893 137,893 372,000 265,000 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 320,000 40,000 40,000 240,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 ProQQsed Fund Balance 110,766 38,766 72,000 Grants In-Hand (WSDOT/Safe!Y) 300,000 30,000 270,000 Grants In-Hand (WTSC) 29,127 29,127 Mitigation In-Hand (fee-in-lieu) 25,000 25,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 WSDOT State (deducted from gra -10,000 -10,000 Other In-Hand (!) Other In-Hand (g) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES n4,893 137,893 372,000 265,000 40,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 Safety 04f2712015 134PM 5 -26 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122115 TIP No.26 CONTACT:Eric Cutshall 425.430.7423 STATUS: This program installs traffic signal uninterruptable power supply/battery backup systems identified and require materials,labor or equipment beyond the normal scope of City maintenance (UPS/BBS)at criticalintersections.pending sufficient funding.Also included in this activities.This program includes providing materials for railroad crossing upgrades and converting program The Citywas awarded a $300,000 Safety grant for a HAWKsignal at DuvallAve school zone signs to electronic operation.NEand NE 12th St and pedestrian countdown signals at various intersections.Completion of these improvements anticipated for summer 2015. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Historically,this level of trafficsafety improvements are required on an annual basis.This program budgets for safety projects to address these needs.Projects are typically identified through citizen concerns,analysis of accident records or observation by City Traffic Operations and Maintenance personnel.The Traffic Operations Section identifies and prioritizes locations. EIIIEEET 774 893 — Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 24,000 Fi-O-W includes Admin Construction 223,000 Construction Services Post Construction Services SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand WSDOT/Safety) Undetermined TOTAL souncss 5.15”002712015 I 34PM 5 -26 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 67 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Preservation of Traffic Operation Devices Program Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: Citywide TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122904 27 CONTACT: Eric Cutshall 425.430.7423 Replace failed or failing traffic signal vehicle detection loops and video detection. This program also Ongoing yearly program. Replacement of traffic signal detection loops, video detection provides for the replacement and/or relocation of signs that are obsolete, faded, poorly located or no camera, traffic signs, traffic signal, street lighting poles and pavement markings is longer appropriate, and replacement of damaged luminaire and signal poles. These poles have been dependent upon yearly inspections. damaged in unknown incidents where reimbursement through normal channels is impossible. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Most of Renton's signals require extensive vehicle detection systems to provide traffic count data needed for the intersection controllers and T ACTIS signal coordination system to operate effectively. Pavement deterioriation due to heavy traffic volumes, trucks, and adverse weather has increased the need for detection loop replacement. Funded: 502 218 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning -------------Preliminary Engineering - -----R-0-W (includes Admin) ---Construction 502,218 68,218 62,000 372,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 Construction Services -------Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 502,218 68,218 62,000 372,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax ---------Business License Fee 502,218 68,218 62,000 372,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 62,000 ------Proposed Fund Balance ---------Grants In-Hand CD -----Grants In-Hand (2) ------ ---------------Mitigation In-Hand ------ ----Other In-Hand (1) ----Other In-Hand (g) -Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 502 218 68218 62000 372 000 62000 62000 62000 62000 62000 62000 0412712015 t 34PM 5 -27 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Preservation of Traffic Operation Devices Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122904 TIP NO.27 CONTACT:Eric Cutshall 425.430.7423 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Replace failed or failing traffic signal vehicle detection loops and video detection.This program also Ongoing yearly program.Replacement of traffic signal detection loops,video detection provides for the replacement and/or relocation of signs that are obsolete,faded,poorly located or no camera,traffic signs.traffic signal,street lighting poles and pavement markings is longer appropriate,and replacement of damaged luminaire and signal poles.These poles have been dependent upon yearly inspections. damaged in unknown incidents where reimbursement through normal channels is impossible. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Most of Renton's signals require extensive vehicle detection systems to provide traffic count data needed for the intersection controllers and TACTIS signal coordination system to operate effectively.Pavement deterioriation due to heavy trafficvolumes.trucks,and adverse weather has increased the need for detection loop replacement. Pro'ect Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 2017 2018 EXPENSES:— Planning Preliminary Engineering Fi-O-W (includes Admin) Construction 372,000 Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 502.218 SOURCE OF FUNDS:M- Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand(1) Grants In-Hand (2) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand(1) Other In-Hand (g) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 5 -27 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 68 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Intelligent Transportation Systems {ITS) Program Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Community Planning Area: N/A TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122162 28 CONTACT: Chris Barnes 425.430.7220 Provides for improvements to the operational efficiency of the roadway system, including development Upgrading of all signal controllers to be compatible with the new central system has been and implementation of signal coordination programs, signing and channelization improvements, completed. This program is updating fiber communications. surveillance control and driver information system (SC & Di), transit signal priority, Intelligent Traffic Systems (ITS) Master Plan and signal improvements such as protective/permissive phasing . . JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Improving the capacity and efficiency of the existing roadway system is a very cost effective element of the transportation program. Funded: 266 005 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning --Preliminary Engineering -· 35,000 5,000 30,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 --5,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) ---Construction 196,005 56,005 20,000 120,000 --20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Construction Services 35,000 5,000 30,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Post Construction Services/Oth TOTAL EXPENSES 266,005 56,005 30,000 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -Business License Fee 240,000 30,000 30,000 180,000 ----· 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 ProQosed Fund Balance 26,005 26,005 -Grants In-Hand (1) __ --Grants In-Hand (g) -----Mitigation In-Hand ----- --~ --------Other In-Hand (!) ---Other In-Hand (2) ------------ --------Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 266 005 56005 30000 180 000 30000 30000 30000 30000 30000 30000 rrs 0412712015 1 :WPM 5 -28 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122162 N/A TIP No.28 CONTACT:Chris Barnes 425.430.7220 .STATUS: Provides for improvements to the operational efficiency of the roadway system,including development Upgrading of all signal controllers to be compatible withthe new central system has been and implementation of signal coordination programs,signing and channelization improvements,completed.This program is updating fiber communications. surveillance control and driver information system (SC &DI),transit signal priority,Intelligent Traffic Systems (ITS)Master Plan and signal improvements such as protective/permissive phasing. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Improving the capacity and efficiency of the existing roadway system is a very cost effective element of the transportation program. Pro'ect Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014m Planning Preliminary Engineering 30,000 R-O-W (includes Admin) Construction 120,000 Construction Services Post Construction Services/Oth TOTAL EXPENSES 266.005 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 180,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand(1) Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand(2) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 5 -28 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 69 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Communi!Y Planning Area: Citywide TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122705 29 CONTACT: Dan Hasty 425.430.7217 This program implements projects that support the City's effort to transition pedestrian facilities within the A project list will be developed based upon sites identified in the Transition Plan section of right-of-way into conformity with provisions contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Sidewalk Study. The ADA Transition Plan is Guidelines. This program provides funding for designing and building features on an "as needed" basis underway and anticipated to be approved in the Spring of 2015. in response to individual requests to improve access for individuals with special needs. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: A programatic approach is required to ensure compliance with federal law. I Funded :1 236 000 Unfunded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 33,000 5,000 28,000 --5,000 5,000 3,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Preliminary Engineering ___ ----------------R-0-W (includes Admin) __ ------Construction 183,000 22,000 161,000 22,000 --22,000 20,000 32,000 32,000 33,000 Construction Services 20,000 3,000 17,000 3,000 3,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 236,000 30,000 206,000 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -------Business License Fee 236,000 30,000 206,000 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 ---ProJ:>osed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) ---------Grants In-Hand (1) --Mitigation In-Hand --------------- ------------Other In-Hand (!) -----------Other In-Hand (2) __ ----------------- -----Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 236000 30,000 206,000 30000 30000 25,000 40000 40000 41000 Bani• Free 0412712015 134PM 5 -29 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Barrier-Free Transition Plan Implementation Functional Classification:N/A 317 Pro].Length:N/A 122705 TIP NO.29 :425.430.7217 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This program implements projects that support the City's effortto transition pedestrian facilities withinthe Aproject listwillbe developed based upon sites identified inthe Transition Plan section of right-of-way into conformity with provisions contained in the Americans withDisabilities Act (ADA)the City of Flenton Comprehensive Citywide Sidewalk Study.The ADATransition Plan is Guidelines.This program provides funding for designing and building features on an "as needed"basis underway and anticipated to be approved in the Spring of 2015. in response to individual requests to improve access for individualswith special needs. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: A programatic approach is required to ensure compliance withfederal law. 236 000 — ProiectTotals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six Year Program 2016 2017 2°18 2019 2020 2021 ——{ET5.000 5,000 3.000 5,000 5,000 5,000 Preliminary Engineering R-O-W includes Admin) Construction 22,000 22,000 20,000 32,000 32,000 33,000 Construction Services 3,000 3,000 2,000 3,000 3,000 3,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 206,000 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 SOURCES OF FUNDS:— Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 206,000 30,000 30,000 25,000 40,000 40,000 41,000 Proposed Fund Balance Bantu Fran 04/Z7I2Dl5 I 34 PM 5 -29 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 70 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Project Development & Pre-Design Program Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A Communi!Y Planning_ Area: N/A TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122150 30 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 Perform critical activities needed for the development of future CIP projects and for grant applications, Ongoing yearly program. This program includes small studies funding and funds required including seeping, cost estimates, pre-design, interlocal agreements and deficiency analysis. Also to match new grants. provides for the monitoring of active grant projects for compliance with State and Federal laws, regulations and specifications. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Analyses of existing and projected transportation operation problems, infrastructure maintenance needs, Funding to this planning program has been reduced to cover its internal staff costs. local and regional mobility goals and revenues/costs are vital to the development of transportation projects that will best serve the needs of Renton and compete well for grants. Also, to maintain eligibility for grant funding, the City must assure that project specifications and management comply with current State and Federal standards. !Funded: 1918 753 Unfunded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning ---713,753 --63,753 120,000 -530,000 85,000 85,000 85,000 90,000 90,000 95,000 Prelimin_ary Engineering 205,000 --25,000 -180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 R-0-W _(includes Admin) ---Construction -----Construction Services -----Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 918,753 63,753 145,000 710,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 883,753 63,753 110,000 710,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 --Proposed Fund Balance 35,000 35,000 ---Grants In-Hand (!) __ ------------Grants In-Hand (2) -----------Mitigation In-Hand --- ------- ----------Other In-Hand ----------Other In-Hand (g} __ -- -----Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 918 753 63,753 145 000 710000 115 000 115 000 115 000 120 000 120 000 125 000 0412712015 134PM 5 -30 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Project DeVeI°Pme"t 8‘P"e'De5I9"P"°9"am Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:122150 N/A TIP NO.30 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Perform criticalactivities needed for the development of future CIP projects and for grant applications,Ongoing yearly program.This program includes small studies funding and funds required including scoping,cost estimates,pre-design,interlocal agreements and deficiency analysis.Also to match new grants. provides forthe monitoring of active grant projects for compliance with State and Federal laws, regulations and specifications. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Analyses of existing and projected transportation operation problems,infrastructure maintenance needs,Funding to this planning program has been reduced to cover its internal staff costs. local and regional mobilitygoals and revenues/costs are vitalto the development oftransportation projects that willbest serve the needs of Flenton and compete well for grants.Also,to maintain eligibility for grant funding,the Citymust assure that project specifications and management comply with current State and Federal standards. 918 753 _ Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program Programmed Spent in 2014 2017 201 8 2019 2020 2021 530,000 85,000 85,000 90,000 90,000 95,000 Preliminary Engineering 180,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 R-O-W includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 710,000 115,000 115,000 115,000 120,000 120,000 125,000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) TOTAL SOURCES 115 000 mu,0 iwznznrs I J4 PM 5 -30 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 71 of 247 Arterial Circulation Pr~gram Community Planning Area: N/A DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 120029 31 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7247 This program provides for the short and long-range planning and traffic analyses required to evaluate This project will fund the ongoing planning work which will lead to refinement and/or and update proposed transportation improvements projects, to assess the impacts of new development adjustment of the of improvement projects on the arterial network identified in the proposals, and to recommend local and regional transportation system improvements for all modes of Transportation Element. travel. Funding for hardware, software and employee hours required to operate the computer model is also included under this program. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Combined State and Federal Clean Air legislation, the Growth Management Act, and the increasing importance of making sure that local and regional transportation plans are coordinated to the benefit of Renton make ongoing multi-modal planning a high priority need. This program will also provide coordination with the 1-405 project team, to assure it provides the maximum benefits and minimum problems for Renton's transportation system. !Funded: 11169 040 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning __ 1,169,040 124,040 160,000 885,000 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Preliminary Engineering R-0-W (includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,169,040 124,040 160,000 885,000 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax -----Business License Fee 1,139,040 124,040 130,000 885,000 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 ProQosed Fund Balance 30,000 30,000 Grants In-Hand (1) -Grants In-Hand (g) -----Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand(!) __ Other In-Hand (g) ---Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 1169 040 124,040 160 000 885 000 145 000 145 000 145 000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Arteriai_Circ 04127/2015 134PM 5 -31 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Arterial Circulation Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:N/A Proj:120029 N/A TIP NO.31 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7247 .STATUS: This program provides for the short and long-range planning and traffic analyses required to evaluate This project willfund the ongoing planning work which willlead to refinement and/or and update proposed transportation improvements projects,to assess the impacts of new development adjustment of the of improvement projects on the arterial network identified inthe proposals,and to recommend local and regional transportation system improvements for all modes of Transportation Element. travel.Funding for hardware,software and employee hours required to operate the computer model is JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Combined State and Federal Clean Air legislation,the Growth Management Act,and the increasing importance of making sure that local and regional transportation plans are coordinated to the benefit of Renton make ongoing multi-modal planning a high priority need.This program willalso provide coordinationwith the I-405 project team,to assure itprovides the maximum benefits and minimum problems for Fienton's transportation system. 1 169 040 Unfunded :T Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent In 2014 2015 Total 2017 2013 2019 2020 2021 Ei —— Planning 124,040 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Preliminary Engineering Fi-O-W(includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 124,040 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 124,040 145,000 145,000 145,000 150,000 150,000 150,000 Proposed Fund Balance Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES Anorl:|_ClrI:04I27I2015 I 14PM 5 -31 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 72 of 247 1% for the Arts Program Community Planning Area: N/A DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: N/A TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122112 32 CONTACT: Juliana Fries 425.430.7232 Funding is tied to the calculated share of eligible types of transportation projects and transportation Program is now based on actual design and construction costs. $13,261 was transferred in funding subject to the City's 1% for the Arts Program. All gateway project proposals under this program 2010 for 2009 expenditures. No transfer occur in 2011 (2010 capital expenses were offset are subject to approval of the Arts Commission. by grant revenues not received in 2009). $7,064 was transferred in 2012 for 2011 capital expenditures. $11,151 was transferred in 2013 for 2012 capital expenditures. $10,454 was transferred in 2014 for 2013 capital expenditures. JUSTIFICATION: This program transfers funds to Fund 125, which is being managed by the Department of Community CHANGES: and Economic Development. Funded: 115 454 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent in 2014 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 115,454 10,454 15,000 90,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Preliminary Engineering ___ R-0-W _(includes Admin) __ Construction -Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 115,454 10,454 15,000 90,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 115,454 10,454 15,000 90,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 ProP-osed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) --Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (g) --Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 115,454 10,454 15,000 90,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 1'4.Ms 0412712015 134PM 5 -32 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED 1%f0"the Arts Program Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Proj:122112 Community Plannin Area:N/A TIP No.32 CONTACT:Juliana Fries 425.430.7232 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Funding is tied to the calculated share of eligible types of transportation projects and transportation Program is now based on actual design and construction costs.$13,261 was transferred in funding subject to the City's 1%for the Arts Program.Allgateway project proposals under this program 2010 for 2009 expenditures.No transfer occur in 2011 (2010 capital expenses were offset are subject to approval of the Arts Commission.by grant revenues not received in 2009).$7,064 was transferred in 2012 for 2011 capital expenditures.$11,151 was transferred in 2013 for 2012 capital expenditures.$10,454 was transferred in2014 for 2013 capital expenditures. JUSTIFICATION: This program transfers funds to Fund 125,which is being managed by the Department of Community CHANGES: and Economic Development. _I?_nfunded:IProjectTotalsProgrammedPre-2016 Six-Year Program rITEMPro-rammed Spent in 2014 2015 2020 I — Planning 10,454 15,000 90,000 15,000 Preliminary Engineering Ft-0~W includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services SOURCE OF FUNDS:—M Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 90.000 Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand 1 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand Undetermined ToTAL sounces 115,454 1'».Am D4IZ7IE)IS I 34 PM 5 -32 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 73 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave N to Gene Coulon Memorial Park Functional Classification: Collector Proj. Length: NIA Community Planning Area: City Center TIP No. 33 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122121 CONTACT: James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 This project includes road widening, traffic signals, railroad crossings, drainage, curb, gutter, Project received a Railroad Crossing Safety grant in 2001 for the signal and gates on Lake sidewalks and bicycle lanes. Developer to design and construct improvements, and get credit toward Washington Blvd. Railroad grade crossing construction complete except for signal start- mitigation contribution. The developer is completing the project in 3 phases. up requirements. Waiting for developer to continue their construction. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: This project will serve the development and access needs to Coulon Park and the Southport The costs shown below are for the estimated mitigation credit, per agreement with the Development. Agreement with developer to credit traffic mitigation towards the costs of certain developer. Project awaiting developer's schedule to continue construction. This project will Improvements. be funded by the development of Southport. !Funded: 12 458143 Unfunded: Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 14,899 14,899 Preliminary Engineering ___ 28,460 28,460 R-0-W @eludes Admin) __ Construction 1,993,821 373,821 20,000 1,600,000 800,000 800,000 Construction Services 405,029 5,029 400,000 200,000 200,000 Post Construction Services 15,934 15,934 TOTAL EXPENSES 2,458,143 438,143 20,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax 3,000 3,000 Business License Fee 2,734 2,734 PrOQOSed Fund Balance 8,828 8,828 Grants In-Hand 1) 149,501 149,501 Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand 258,353 258,353 Other (DeveloQer Expenditure) 2,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Other (DeveloQer Reimb) 35,727 15,727 20,000 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 2 458143 438143 20,000 2000000 1 000 000 1 000 000 0412712015 1 :WPM 5 -33 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Lake Washington Blvd N -Park Ave Nto Gene Coulon Memorial Park Functional Classification:Collector Fund:317 Proj.Length:N/A Pro]:122121 TIP No.33 CONTACT:James Wilhoit 425.430.7319 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project includes road widening,trafficsignals,railroad crossings,drainage,curb,gutter,Project received a Railroad Crossing Safety grant in 2001 for the signal and gates on Lake sidewalks and bicycle lanes.Developer to design and construct improvements,and get credit toward Washington Blvd.Railroad grade crossing construction complete except for signal stan- mitigation contribution.The developer is completing the project in 3 phases.up requirements.Waiting for developer to continue their construction. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: This project willserve the development and access needs to Coulon Park and the Southport The costs shown below are for the estimated mitigation credit,per agreement with the Development.Agreement withdeveloper to credit traffic mitigation towards the costs ofcertain developer.Project awaiting developer's schedule to continue construction.This project will improvements.be funded by the development of Southport. Iimtzij 2 453 143 [Unfunded:[ Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program 2017 2018 2020 @- — 201 9ITEM Planning 14,899 Preliminary Engineering 28,460 R-O-W (includes Admin) Construction 1,993,821 1,600,000 800,000 800,000 Construction Services 400,000 200,000 200,000 Post Construction Services 1.000.000 1.000.000 SOURCE OF FUNDS:—M Vehicle Fuel Tax 3,000 Business License Fee 2,734 Proposed Fund Balance 8,828 149,501 149,501 Grants In-Hand(g)____ _j_MitigationIn-Hand 258,353 258,353 Other Developer Expenditure)2,000,000 2.000.000 1.000.000 1.000.000 Other (Developer Fleimb) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 2 000 000 5 -33 First Draft D4I27I20l5 I 34PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 74 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St Functional Classification: Minor Arterial Proj. Length: 1.69 miles Community Planning Area: Valley TIP No. 34 DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 120024 CONTACT: Bob Mahn 425.430.7322 Widen existing roadway to five lanes where required. Includes new roadway, curbs, sidewalks, drainage, The needs, priorities and schedules for improvements on Lind Ave SW will be determined signals, lighting, signing and channelization. through Arterial Circulation studies. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Increasing traffic demands in the Valley due in part to development will create the need for increasing the capacity of this major north/south arterial. A potential project is a signal installation at the intersection at Lind Ave SW and SW 34th St (currently unsignalized). Additionally, improvements may result from future WSDOT 1-405 plans which include an interchange at Lind Ave SW (currently unfunded). !Funded: I !Unfunded: 14 400 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning -----Preliminary Engineering 650,000 650,000 400,000 250,000 R-0-W .(includes Admin) __ ----Construction 3,200,000 3,200,000 1,200,000 2,000,000 Construction Services 550,000 550,000 200,000 350,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 4,400,000 4,400,000 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax --Business License Fee ------Proposed Fund Balance --Grants In-Hand (1) __ --------Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand -----Other In-Hand (1) Other In-Hand (2} -- Undetermined 4,400,000 4,400,000 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 TOTAL SOURCES 4400000 4400000 400000 1 650,000 2 350 000 0412712015 134PM 5 -34 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED Lind Ave SW -SW 16th St to SW 43rd St Functional Classification:MinorAnerial Fund:317 Proj.Length:1.69 miles Proj:120024 Communi Plannin Area:Valle TIP No.34 CONTACT:Bob Mahn 425.430.7322 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: Widen existing roadway to five lanes where required.Includes new roadway,curbs,sidewalks,drainage,The needs,priorities and schedules for improvements on LindAve SW willbe determined signals,lighting,signing and channelization.through Arterial Circulation studies. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Increasing traffic demands inthe Valley due in part to development willcreate the need for increasing the capacity ofthis major north/south arterial.A potential project is a signal installation at the intersection at Lind Ave SW and SW 34th St (currently unsignalized).Additionally,improvements may result from future WSDOT I-405 plans which include an interchange at Lind Ave SW (currently unfunded)._ Unfunded :4 400 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 TEXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 650,000 400,000 250,000 Fl-O-W includes Admin) Construction 8,200,000 1.200,000 2,000,000 Construction Services 550,000 200,000 350,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,550.000 2.350.000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand(1) Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation ln~Hand Other In-Hand 0) Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 400,000 1,650,000 2,350,000 TOTAL SOURCES 400 000 1 650 000 2 350 0005c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 75 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Sunset Lane/NE 10th St Roadway Improvements Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: Community Planning Area: Highlands TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122122 35 CONTACT: Keith Woolley 425.430.7318 This project will reconstruct Sunset Lane to accomodate a 2 lane roadway with on-street parallel and This project was one of the multi-modal improvements identified in the Sunset Area Green angle parking. The project will also extend NE 1oth St (Harrington Ave NE to Glenwood Ave NE). Connection (TIP #13). This project was separated from the Sunset Area Green Includes roadway pavement, curbs, sidewalks, landscape buffer, ADA improvements, drainage, lighting, Connection as funding for 30% design has been indetified. Funding for final design and signing and channelization. construction of the project is undetermined. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The improvements are key to support the redevelopment of the Sunset Area Community in the Highlands area. The City is in partnership with the Renton Housing Authority to redevelop the Sunset Terrace public housing community. The goal is to encourage private development and support the new public library and the Sunset Neighborhood Park as proposed in the Planned Action Study area. !Funded: 1800000 !Unfunded: 13 965 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering __ 800,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 R-0-W _(includes Admin) --Construction 3,165,000 3,165,000 3,165,000 Construction Services 800,000 800,000 800,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 4,765,000 400,000 4,365,000 400,000 3,965,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax --Business License Fee -------ProQosed Fund Balance -----------Grants In-Hand (1) Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand -- Other In-Hand (General Fund tran 800,000 400,000 400,000 400,000 -------Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 3,965,000 3,965,000 3,965,000 TOTAL SOURCES 4,765,000 400,000 4,365,000 400,000 3,965,000 0412712015 134PM 5 -35 First Draft CITYOF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Sunset LanelNE 10th St Roadway Improvements FunctionalClassification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:Proj:122122 Community Planning Area:Highlands TIP No.CONTACT:Keith Woolley 425.430.7313 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: This project willreconstruct Sunset Lane to accomodate a 2 lane roadway withon-street parallel and This project was one of the multi-modal improvements identified in the Sunset Area Green angle parking.The project willalso extend NE 10th St (HarringtonAve NEto Glenwood Ave NE).Connection (TIP #13).This project was separated from the Sunset Area Green Includes roadway pavement,curbs,sidewalks,landscape buffer,ADAimprovements,drainage,lighting,Connection as funding for 30%design has been indetified.Funding for final design and signing and channelization.construction of the project is undetermined. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The improvements are key to support the redevelopment of the Sunset Area Community inthe Highlands area.The Cityis in partnership withthe Renton Housing Authorityto redevelop the Sunset Terrace public housing community.The goal is to encourage private development and support the new public library and the Sunset Neighborhood Park as proposed in the Planned Action Study area. Funded :EIIIIIIIIEJ 3 965 000 Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-201 5 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Prelim‘na Engineering 400,000 400,000 400,000 H-O-W includes Admin) Construction 3,165,000 3,165,000 Construction Services 800,000 800,000 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES,3,965,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (1) Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (General Fund trans.400,000 400,000 Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined 3,965,000 3,965,000 TOTAL SOURCES 4,365,000 3,955,000 04/27/2015 I 34 PM 5 -35 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 76 of 247 NE 31st St Bridge Replacement Community Plannina Area: Kennydale DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122605 36 CONTACT: Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 The NE 31st Street Bridge (aka May Creek Bridge) was built by King County in 1950. The area was A grant in the amount of $1,222,095 from the 2014 Bridge Federal Funding was awarded annexed into the City in 1960. This project will replace the existing substandard bridge. The sufficiency for this project in 2014. A 20% match is required for preliminary engineering and right-of- rating of the existing structure is 27 SD. Per WSDOT standards, bridges with sufficiency rating below 40 way. Projects that obtain construction authorization by September 2018 are eligible for a SD are recommended replacement. lower local match of 13.5% for the construction phase (otherwise, the local match is 20% for the construction phase). JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: The NE 31st St serves as the only public access to several homes. The existing bridge is built on timber New project. piles. Two of the piles have been red tagged due to advance rot near the groundline. Temporary shoring has been installed at the central pier to support the load capacity of the bridge (without the temporary supports the bridge may require closure). However the temporary supports are not scour resistant (with high creek flows they could wash out). Funded: 1 436 900 !Unfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 280,000 252,000 28,000 28,000 R-0-W (includes Admin) __ --40,000 -----36,000 4,000 4,000 Construction 915,000 915,000 823,500 91,500 Construction Services 201,900 201,900 181,800 20,100 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 1,436,900 288,000 1,148,900 1,037,300 111,600 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 72,690 57,600 15,090 15,090 ProQosed Fund Balance 142,115 142,115 142,115 Grants In-Hand (Bridg~) __ 1,222,095 230,400 991,695 895,185 96,510 Grants In-Hand (2) -Mitigation In-Hand ----- ----Other In-Hand (Cit}! Funds) Other In-Hand (g) --- Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 1,436,900 288,000 1,148,900 1,037,300 111,600 0412712015 1.34PM 5 -36 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED NE 31st St Bridge Replacement Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Proi.Length:Proj:122605 Communi Planning Area:Kennydale TIP No.36 CONTACT:Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: The NE 31st Street Bridge (aka May Creek Bridge)was built by King County in 1950.The area was A grant in the amount of $1,222,095 from the 2014 Bridge Federal Funding was awarded annexed into the City in 1960.This project willreplace the existing substandard bridge.The sufficiency for this project in 2014.A 20%match is required for preliminary engineering and right-of- rating of the existing structure is 27 SD.Per WSDOT standards,bridges withsufficiency rating below 40 way.Projects that obtain construction authorization by September 2018 are eligible for a SD are recommended replacement.lower local match of 13.5%for the construction phase (otherwise,the local match is 20% for the construction phase). JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The NE 31st St serves as the only public access to several homes.The existing bridge is builton timber New project. piles.Two of the piles have been red tagged due to advance rot near the groundline.Temporary shoring has been installed at the central pier to support the load capacity of the bridge (withoutthe temporary supports the bridge may require closure).However the temporary supports are not scour resistant (with high creek flows they could wash out). 1 436 900 Unfunded :- Project Totals Pro -rammed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 2017 2018mTT Planning Preliminary Engineering 252,000 R-O-W (includes Admin)36,000 Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services 1,031,300 —T Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 15,090 Proposed Fund Balance 142,115 142,115 Grants In-Hand(Bridge)991,695 895,185 Grants In-Hand (2) Mitigation In-Hand 28,000 4,000 823,500 181,800 Other in-Hand (Qty Funds) Other in-Hand (_2) Undetermined TOTAL souncr-:s 1.037.300 5 -36 First Draft 04l27I2DI5 I 34PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 77 of 247 N 27th PI Culvert Scour Repair Community Planning Area: Kennydale DESCRIPTION: CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: TIP No. STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 122607 37 CONTACT: Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 As part of the Clover Creek development, a new street was constructed over Kennydale Creek. This A grant in the amount of $481,474 from the 2014 Bridge Federal Funding was awarded for project will provide scour mitigation for the N 27th PI Culvert. This bridge is 20-foot long and is located on this project. A 10% match is required for preliminary engineering and right-of-way. No a residential street. The mitigation consists of placement of concrete under the exposed footing, match is required for construction if authorization is obtained by Sep 2018. placement of streambed sediment and cobbles to armor the channel. JUSTIRCATION: CHANGES: The stream has scoured down to below one of the spread footings. A load rating and scour plan of action New project. have recently been done for this structure. !Funded: 1492 474 fUnfunded: I Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 85,000 76,500 8,500 8,500 R-0-W (includes Admin) 25,000 22,500 2,500 2,500 Construction 270,000 270,000 243,000 27,000 Construction Services 112,474 112,474 101,220 11,254 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 492,474 99,000 393,474 355,220 38,254 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee 9,900 9,900 Pro)Josed Fund Balance 1 '100 1,100 1,100 Grants In-Hand (Bridge) 481,474 89,100 392,374 354,120 38,254 Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand Other In-Hand (Ci!Y. Funds) ---Other In-Hand (2) Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 492,474 99,000 393,474 355,220 38,254 0412'712015 1.34PM 5 -37 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLICWORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM -AMENDED N 27th Pl Culvert Scour Repair FunctionalClassification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:Proj:122607 Community Planning Area:Kennydale TIP No.37 CONTACT:Derek Akesson 425.430.7337 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: As part of the Clover Creek development,a new street was constructed over Kennydale Creek.This A grant in the amount of $481,474 from the 2014 Bridge Federal Funding was awarded for project willprovide scour mitigation for the N 27th Pl Culvert.This bridge is 20-foot long and is located on this project.A 10%match is required for preliminary engineering and right-of-way.No a residential street.The mitigation consists of placement of concrete under the exposed footing,match is required for construction ifauthorization is obtained by Sep 2018. placement of streambed sediment and cobbles to armor the channel. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: The stream has scoured down to below one of the spread footings.A load rating and scour plan of action New project. have recently been done forthis structure. Funded :492 474 j Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering 85.000 76,500 8,500 8,500 Fl-O-W(includes Admin)25,000 22.500 2.500 2,500 Construction 270.000 270,000 243,000 Construction Services 112,474 112,474 101,220 Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 492,474 393,474 355,220 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance 1.100 1,100 Grants In-Hand (Bridge)392,374 354,120 Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES 393,474 355,220 38,254 04/27/2015 I34 PMIII! 5 -37 First Draft5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 78 of 247 CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016-2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM-AMENDED Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 5 Functional Classification: N/A Proj. Length: 0.76 mi Community Planning Area: TIP No. DESCRIPTION: STATUS: Fund: 317 Proj: 38 CONTACT: Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 This is Phase 5 of the Rainier Ave Corridor Improvements, and will extend the improvements from NW Funds shown in 2020 are for planning to determine the roadway cross section. Project 3rd PI to north City limits. Project elements include sidewalks widening with streetscaping, adding cost estimated at $31.5M and is unfunded. Costs beyong 2021 not shown. pedestrian-scale illumination and planted buffer strips. The street may be narrowed from 5 to 3 lanes where feasible. On the east side of Rainier Ave the new multi-use trail will be installed (Lake Washington Loop Trail), as shown on TIP 18. JUSTIFICATION: CHANGES: Rainier Ave is a critical corridor in Renton with existing operational problems and in need of infrastructure New project. enhancements to provide greater ease for non-motorized and transit-based travel. IFunded: I !Unfunded: 14 500 000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Programmed Spent Pre-2015 2015 Total 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 EXPENSES: Planning 100,000 100,000 100,000 Preliminary Engineering 4,400,000 4,400,000 4,400,000 R-0-W (includes Admin} --Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES 4,500,000 4,500,000 100,000 4,400,000 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants In-Hand (Bridg~) __ Grants In-Hand (g) Mitigation In-Hand --Other In-Hand (Ci!}l Funds) Other In-Hand (2) -- Undetermined 4,500,000 4,500,000 100,000 4,400,000 TOTAL SOURCES 4,500,000 4,500,000 100,000 4,400,000 Lind 0412712015 1 :WPM 5 -38 First Draft CITY OF RENTON PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2016 -2021 TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTPROGRAM -AMENDED Rainier Ave N Corridor Improvements -Phase 5 Functional Classification:N/A Fund:317 Pro].Length:0.76 mi Proj: Community Plannin -Area:TIP No.38 CONTACT:Jim Seitz 425.430.7245 DESCRIPTION:STATUS: his is Phase 5 of the Fiainier Ave Corridor Improvements,and willextend the improvements from NW Funds shown in2020 are for planning to determine the roadway cross section.Project 3rd PIto north City limits.Project elements include sidewalks widening with streetscaping,adding cost estimated at $31 .5M and is unfunded.Costs beyong 2021 not shown. pedestrian-scale illumination and planted buffer strips.The street may be narrowed from 5 to 3 lanes where feasible.On the east side of FiainierAve the new multi-use trailwillbe installed (Lake Washington Loop Trail),as shown on TIP 18. JUSTIFICATION:CHANGES: Rainier Ave is a critical corridor in Fientonwith existing operational problems and in need of infrastructure New project. enhancements to provide greater ease for non-motorized and transit-based travel. —500000 Project Totals Programmed Pre-2016 Six-Year Program ITEM Pro -rammed Spent Pre-2015 2015 2016 2017 2013 2019 2020 ‘ 100,000 100,000 4,400,000 EXPENSES: Planning Preliminary Engineering FI«O~W includes Admin) Construction Construction Services Post Construction Services TOTAL EXPENSES SOURCE or FUNDS: — ——T Vehicle Fuel Tax Business License Fee Proposed Fund Balance Grants in-Hand Bridge) Grants In-Hand (g) MitigationIn-Hand Other In-Hand (Qty Funds) Other In-Hand (2) T_:_j__j_ Undetermined 4.500.000 100,000 TOTAL SOURCES 4,500,000 5 -38 First Draft 0027/2015 I 34PM5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 79 of 247 SECTION SIX APPENDIX • Abbreviations & Acronyms • TIP Adopting Resolution 6-1 6-2 SECTION SIX APPENDIX 0 Abbreviations &Acronyms 0 TIP Adopting Resolution 6-2 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 80 of 247 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS The following list defines the abbreviated words or acronyms used in the City of Renton's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. ACP ADA BAT BNSF BRAC CBD CIP CMAQ CTR DOE EB ECL EIS ER FHWA FMSIB GIS GMA HOV ITS LF LID LOS MAP-21 METRO MOU MUTCD NCL NB PMS Precon PS&E ROW RTA SB SCATBd SCL SMA sov ST Asphalt Concrete Pavement American Disability Act Business Access Transit Burlington Northern Santa Fe Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee Central Business District Capital Improvement Program Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Commute Trip Reduction (State Act) Department of Ecology Eastbound East City Limits Environmental Impact Study Emergency Relief Federal Highway Administration Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board Geographic Information System Growth Management Act High Occupancy Vehicles Intelligent Transportation System Linear Feet Local Improvement District Level of Service Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Memorandum of Understanding Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices North City Limits Northbound Pavement Management System Preconstruction Engineering/Administration (design phase of project) Plans, Specifications, and Estimates Right-of-way Regional Transit Authority Southbound South County Area Transportation Board South City Limits Structural Matrix Asphalt Single Occupant Vehicle Sound Transit 6-1 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS The following list defines the abbreviated words or acronyms used in the City of Renton’s Six-Year Transportation Improvement Plan. ACP Asphalt Concrete Pavement ADA American Disability Act BAT Business Access Transit BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe BRAC Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee CBD Central Business District CIP Capital Improvement Program CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality CTR Commute Trip Reduction (State Act) DOE Department of Ecology EB Eastbound ECL East City Limits EIS Environmental Impact Study ER Emergency Relief FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMSIB Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board GIS Geographic Information System GMA Growth Management Act HOV High Occupancy Vehicles ITS Intelligent Transportation System LF Linear Feet LID Local Improvement District LOS Level of Service MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21“Century Act METRO Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle MOU Memorandum of Understanding MUTCD Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices NCL North City Limits NB Northbound PMS Pavement Management System Precon Preconstruction Engineering/Adrninistration (design phase of project) PS&E Plans,Specifications,and Estimates ROW Right-of-way RTA Regional Transit Authority SB Southbound SCATBd South County Area Transportation Board SCL South City Limits SMA Structural Matrix Asphalt SOV Single Occupant Vehicle ST Sound Transit 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 81 of 247 STP TDM TEA-21 TIB TIP UPRR UPS WB WCL WSBIS WSDOT Surface Transportation Program Transportation Demand Management Program Transportation Efficiency Act Transportation Improvement Board Transportation Improvement Plan Union Pacific Railroad Uninterruptible Power Supple Westbound West City Limits Washington State Bridge Inventory System Washington State Department of Transportation H:\Division.s\TRANSPOR.T A T\PLANNING\Juliana\TIP\20 15\Publish\ACRONYMS.doc STP Surface Transportation Program TDM Transportation Demand Management Program TEA—21 Transportation Efficiency Act TIB Transportation Improvement Board TIP Transportation Improvement Plan UPRR Union Pacific Railroad UPS Uninterruptible Power Supple WB Westbound WCL West City Limits WSBIS Washington State Bridge Inventory System WSDOT Washington State Department of Transportation H:\Division.s\TRANSPOR.TAT\PLANNlNG\.luliana\TlP\20l5\Publish\ACRONYMS.doc 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 82 of 247 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. __ _ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, UPDATING RENTON'S SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR 2016-2021. WHEREAS, the City of Renton has adopted a "Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program" pursuant to RCW 35.77.010 (Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures), and the plan and program having been amended and modified from time to time as authorized by law; and WHEREAS, the City Council, after recommendation of the Public Works Department, held a public hearing on June 15, 2015, after notice to the public as provided by law for the purpose of considering adoption, modification, and amendments of the plan and program; and WHEREAS, at the public hearing held on June 15, 2015, due consideration was given to the proposed changes and amendments for the purpose of updating the plan and program; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. Renton's "Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program" is amended and modified, as more particularly shown on the attached Exhibits "A" and "B", incorporated as if fully detailed in this resolution. SECTION Ill. The plan and program, as evidenced by exhibits, shall be and constitute Renton's "Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program", and shall remain in full force and effect until further revised, amended, and modified as provided by law. 1 CITYOF RENTON,WASHINGTON RESOLUTIONNO. A RESOLUTIONOF THECITYOF RENTON,WASHINGTON,UPDATING RENTON’S SIX-YEARTRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR 2016 —2021. WHEREAS,the City of Renton has adopted a ”Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program”pursuant to RCW 35.77.010 (Perpetual advanced six-year plans for coordinated transportation program expenditures),and the plan and program having been amended and modified from time to time as authorized by law;and WHEREAS,the City Council,after recommendation of the Public Works Department, held a public hearing on June 15,2015,after notice to the public as provided by law for the purpose of considering adoption,modification,and amendments of the plan and program;and WHEREAS,at the public hearing held on June 15,2015,due consideration was given to the proposed changes and amendments for the purpose of updating the plan and program; NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITYCOUNCILOF THE CITYOF RENTON,WASHINGTON,DOES RESOLVEAS FOLLOWS: SECTIONI.The above findings are true and correct in all respects. SECTIONII.Renton’s ”Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program”is amended and modified,as more particularly shown on the attached Exhibits "A”and ”B”,incorporated as if fully detailed in this resolution. SECTIONIII.The plan and program,as evidenced by exhibits,shall be and constitute Renton’s "Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program”,and shall remain in full force and effect until further revised,amended,and modified as provided by law. 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 83 of 247 RESOLUTION NO. __ _ SECTION IV. The Administrator of the Public Works Department and the City Clerk are authorized and directed to file this resolution, together with the exhibits, with the Director of Highways for the State of Washington and as otherwise provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this __ day of ______ _, 2015. Jason A. Seth, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this __ day of ________ , 2015 .. Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RES.1672:4/29/15:scr Denis Law, Mayor 2 RESOLUTIONNO. I SECTIONIV.The Administrator of the Public Works Department and the City Clerk are authorized and directed to file this resolution,together with the exhibits,with the Director of Highways for the State of Washington and as otherwise provided by law. PASSEDBYTHECITYCOUNCILthis day of 2015. Jason A.Seth,City Clerk APPROVEDBYTHE MAYORthis day of ,2015.. Denis Law,Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J.Warren,City Attorney RES.1672:4/29/15:scr 5c. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of a resolution to Page 84 of 247 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Amendment No. 6 to The Boeing Company Lease (LAG 10-001) Meeting: REGULAR COUNCIL - 01 Jun 2015 Exhibits: A. Issue Paper B. Amendment No. 6 Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Transportation Systems Division Staff Contact: Jonathan Wilson, Airport Manager, ext. 7477 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ N/A Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ N/A Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ N/A City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The Boeing Company leases both the 760 and 770 parcels under lease LAG 10-001, with a lease-back provision under Amendment No. 4, which allows the Airport to rent tie downs in these parcels to individuals. The termination date of the lease-back provision was March 31, 2015. The Boeing Company agreed to extend the Airport’s use of the parcels beyond March 31, 2015. Boeing has provided the City with notice to terminate the lease-back option on August 31, 2015. All other terms of the lease of the 760 and 770 parcels remain unchanged. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Amendment No. 6 to The Boeing Company’s lease agreement LAG 10-001, which extends the Airport’s use of the 760 and 770 parcels for tenant tie downs until August 31, 2015. 5d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 85 of 247 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:June 1, 2015 TO:Ed Prince, Council President Members of the Renton City Council VIA:Denis Law, Mayor FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator STAFF CONTACT:Jonathan Wilson (ext. 7477) SUBJECT:Amendment No. 6 to The Boeing Company Lease LAG 10-001 ISSUE: Should Council approve Amendment No. 6 to The Boeing Company’s lease agreement LAG 10-001 to extend the Airport’s use of the 760 and 770 parcels for tenant tie downs to August 31, 2015, and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the amendment? RECOMMENDATION: Approve Amendment No. 6 to The Boeing Company’s lease agreement LAG 10-001 for the extension of the Airport’s use of the 760 and 770 parcels for tenant tie downs and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the amendment. BACKGROUND: The Boeing Company leases the 760 and 770 parcels under lease Amendment No. 4, effective August 15, 2013 and terminating August 14, 2018, with the option for two 1-year extensions. The amendment includes a lease-back provision allowing the Airport to continue using the 760 and 770 parcels to rent tie downs to individuals on a month-to-month basis. The original term of the lease-back provision in Amendment No. 4 expired on March 31, 2015. The Boeing Company does not have an immediate need to use the 760 and 770 parcels and has agreed to extend the lease-back provision to August 31, 2015. Amendment No. 6 extends the lease-back provision allowing the Airport to continue using the 760 and 770 parcels for individual tenant tie downs and adds the 120-day termination notice provision which is August 31, 2015. The monthly rent reduction of $3,724 will continue as long as the City has the ability to lease these tie down spaces. cc:Doug Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator – Transportation Jonathan Wilson, Airport Manager Hai Nguyen, Finance Analyst Josef Harnden, Transportation Administrative Secretary 5d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 86 of 247 LAG-i0-001AMENDMENTNO.6AMENDMENTNO.6T0LEASEAGREEMENTLAG-i0-001(CityofRentontoTheBoeingCompany)THISAMENDMENTNo.6toLeaseAgreementLAG-i0-001(‘AmendmentNo.6”)isenteredintoasofApril1,2015,bytheCityofRenton,aMunicipalCorporation(Landlord)andTheBoeingCompany,aDelawarecorporation(Tenant)andamendsthatcertainleaseagreementLAG-i0-001datedJune1,2010asamendedtothedatehereof(the“Lease”).RECITALS:1.WHEREAS,theTenantisleasingthe760and770Parcelsunderlease,LAG10-001asamendedbyAmendmentNo.4;and2.WHEREAS,underAmendmentNo.4,LandlordprovidesanannualdiscountforCurrentTenantRentalIncomeof$44,689,asdefinedinSection5ofAmendmentNo.4;and3.WHEREAS,theTenanthasgrantedtheLandlorduseofthe760Parcelandthe770ParcelunderleaseAmendmentNo.4,untilMarch31,2015;and4.WHEREAS,theTenantandtheLandlordhaveagreedtoextendLandlord’suseofthe760Parcelandthe770Parceltoadatenoearlierthan120daysafterthedeliveryofanoticebyTenant,whichdateshallbenoearlierthanAugust20,2015andnolaterthanOctober1,2015;and5.WHEREAS,LandlordagreestocontinueprovidinganannualdiscountforCurrentTenantRentalIncomeof$44,689,asdefinedinSection5ofAmendmentNo.4,untiltheendoftheCurrentTenantLeasePeriod.NOW,THEREFORE,INCONSIDERATIONOFTHETERMSANDCONDITIONSHEREINCONTAINEDANDFOROTHERGOODANDVALUABLECONSIDERATION,THERECEIPTANDSUFFICIENCYOFWHICHISHEREBYACKNOWLEDGED,LANDLORDANDTENANTAGREETOAMENDTHELEASEASSETFORTHBELOW:WITNESSETH:LandlordandTenantagreetoamendtheLease,inthefollowingrespects:A.Section1.b.Landlord’sRicihttoContinueLeasinthe760&770Parcels,amendedunderAmendmentNo.4oftheLeaseisamendedtoreadasfollows:“Landlordshallcontinueleasingthe760Parcelandthe770ParceltotheCurrentTenants(whoshallbetreatedastenantsofLandlordandnotsubtenantsofTenantforpurposesoftheLease,andwhoshallpaytheirrentsdirectlytoLandlord)untilsuchtimeasTenantprovideswrittennoticetoLandlordthatTenantrequiresuseofsaidORIGINALM5d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 87 of 247 LAG-i0-001AMENDMENTNO.6parcels,whichnoticeshallbeprovidedtoLandlordnolaterthan120dayspriortothedateofTenantsrequireduse(theCurrentTenantLeasePeriod),PROVIDEDthattheCurrentTenantLeasePeriodshallendpursuanttotheforegoingnoearlierthanAugust20,2015andnolaterthanOctober1,2015.DuringtheCurrentTenantLeasePeriod,Tenantshallhavetherighttoenterthe760Parcelandthe770Parcelfromtimetotimeforthepurposeofmakingsoilboringsandtakingsoilsamples,conductingsurveywork,andperformingothertaskspreliminarytoTenant’sfutureoccupancyanddevelopmentofthe760Parcelandthe770Parcel,PROVIDEDthatTenantshallnotleaveanyequipmentorinstallationsonthe760Parcelor770ParcelandTenantshallscheduleitsentriesanditsactivitiesduringtheCurrentTenantLeasePeriodsoasnottointerferewiththebusinessoftheCurrentTenantsonthe760Parcelorthe770Parcel.Tenantshall,atTenantscost,havetherighttoconductanenvironmentalassessment(inadditiontothesoilboringsprovidedforabove)oftheApronCParcelsaftertheCurrentTenantshavebeenrelocatedtoestablishtheenvironmentalconditionofthe760and770ParcelspriortoTenantsoccupancy.AttheendoftheCurrentTenantLeasePeriod,LandlordshallensurethattheCurrentTenantsarenolongerinpossessionofthe760Parceland770Parcel.B.Section4.a.l.RentaloffsetfortheArronCParcels,asamendedunderAmendmentNo.4oftheLeaseisamendedtoreadasfollows:BeginningonthecommencementoftheTermfortheApronCParcelsandendingonSeptember30,2015,orwhenTenanttakespossessionofthe760and770Parcels,whicheverisearlier,LandlordshallapplyacreditofThreeThousandSevenHundredTwentyFourdollarsandzerocents($3,724.00)permonth,whichamountisone-twelfthoftheCurrentTenantRentalIncome,towardtheMinimumMonthlyRentpaidbytheTenantundertheLease,asamendedherein.C.SectionFMiscellaneousasamendedunderAmendmentNo.4oftheLeaseisamendedtoreadasfollows:ThisAmendmentNo.6willbeeffectiveonApril1,2015.ThisAmendmentNo.6maybeexecutedinmultiplecounterparts,eachofwhichshallbedeemedanoriginal,butallofwhich,together,shallconstitutebutoneandthesameinstrument.ThisAmendmentNo.6shallbegovernedbythelawoftheStateofWashington,withoutreferencetoitschoiceoflawrules.ThisAmendmentNo.6supersedesanyprioragreements,negotiationsandcommunications,oralorwritten,withrespecttotheadditionofthe760Parcelandthe770ParceltothePremisesundertheLeaseandcontainstheentireagreementbetween,andthefinalexpressionof,theLandlordandTenantwithrespecttotheadditionofthe760Parcelandthe770ParceltothePremises.Nosubsequentagreement,representation,or15d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 88 of 247 LAG-10-001AMENDMENTNO.6promisemadebyeitherpartyhereto,orbyortoanemployee,officer,agentorrepresentativeofeitherpartyheretoshallbeofanyeffectunlessitisinwritingandexecutedbythepartytobeboundthereby.AsamendedbythisAmendmentNo.6,theLeasecontinuesinfullforceandeffectinaccordancewithitsterms.OnandafterthedateofthisAmendmentNo.6,theLeaseshallbedeemedamendedbythisAmendmentNo.6andallreferencesintheLeaseto“thisAgreement”“thisLease”“herein”“hereof”andthelikeshallbedeemedtobereferencestotheLeaseasamendedbythisAmendmentNo.6.”35d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 89 of 247 LAG-i0-001AMENDMENTNO.6D.Exceptasmodifiedherein,aDtermsoftheGroundandBuildingLease(LAG10-001)andAddenda,thereto,shallremainunchangedandshaDremaininfullforceandeffect.ExecutedbyLandlordandTenantasofthedatefirstwrittenabove.TheBoeingCompanyCITYOFRENTONaDelawareCorporationaMunicipalCorporationDenisLawMayorTitleJasonSethCityClerkDateApprovedastolegalformCityAttorney45d. - Transportation Systems Division recommends approval of an amendment Page 90 of 247 CITY OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENDA BILL Subject/Title: Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194, Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project with APS Surveying & Mapping Meeting: REGULAR COUNCIL - 01 Jun 2015 Exhibits: A. Issue Paper B. Engineering Consultant Agreement Submitting Data: Dept/Div/Board: Utility Systems Division Staff Contact: Ron Straka, x7248, Edward Mulhern, x7323 Recommended Action: Council Concur Fiscal Impact: Expenditure Required: $ 305,000 (2015/16) Transfer Amendment: $N/A Amount Budgeted: $ 350,000 (2015)Revenue Generated: $N/A Total Project Budget: $ 350,000 (2015)City Share Total Project: $ N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194 with APS Surveying and Mapping for the "Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project" increases the contract budget by $305,000 to add additional work and extends the contract schedule until August 31, 2016. The initial APS Phase 2 contract work and budget successfully tested work flow methods for efficient field survey data collection and transfer to the City’s GIS. The initial contract amount was intentionally smaller to verify the data collection work flow process as proposed by the consultant. Work on the initial scope was successful, including demonstrating efficiencies of methodologies. Addendum No. 2 provides budget to survey and collect data for 1,749 identified City-maintained stormwater structures and approximately 460 stormwater structures that may be newly discovered during the project field work. The addendum also extends the time to complete the field survey and data collection. Addendum No. 2 increases the contract amount from $191,851 to $496,851. The 2015 project budget of $350,000 is appropriated in the approved 2015 Capital Improvement Program Storm System Field Mapping – NPDES Permit account (427.475455). STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approve Addendum No. 2 to contract CAG-13-194 with APS Surveying and Mapping to increase the contract by $305,000 and extend the contract schedule until August 31, 2016 for the "Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project." 5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 91 of 247 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE:May 20, 2015 TO:Ed Prince, Council President Members of Renton City Council VIA:Denis Law, Mayor FROM:Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator STAFF CONTACT:Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Manager, ext. 7248 Edward Mulhern, Surface Water Engineer, ext. 7323 SUBJECT:Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194, Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project with APS Surveying & Mapping ISSUE: Should Council authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194 with APS Surveying and Mapping for the Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project, to increase the scope, amend the budget by $305,000, and extend the schedule to August 31, 2016? RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194 with APS Surveying and Mapping for the Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) – NPDES Permit Project, in the amount of $305,000, and extend the schedule to August 31, 2016. BACKGROUND: The purpose of the APS Surveying and Mapping agreement is to field verify the location of known stormwater system structures and connections to upstream systems, identify and survey unknown structures and collect data to fill in missing attributes for stormwater system assets in the City’s GIS. The initial Engineering Consultant Agreement with APS Surveying and Mapping for the Storm System Field Mapping (Phase 2) was initiated with a smaller budget to test work flow methods for efficient field survey data collection and transfer to the City’s GIS. The initial contract amount was intentionally smaller to verify the data collection workflow process would work as proposed by the consultant. Workflow processes include a real-time connection with the City’s GIS through a specialized Geocortex site (COR Maps) established for the project to view specific assets that need data to be collected. This included coordination with City maintenance crews to ensure that stormwater structures are free of obstructions, provide CCTV support for locating buried 5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 92 of 247 Ed Prince, Council President Members of the Renton City Council Page 2 of 2 May 20, 2015 H:\File Sys\SWP - Surface Water Projects\SWP-27 - Surface Water Projects (CIP)\27-3472 Storm Mapping Project\PHASE II (Field Collection)\APS Contract 2\CAG-13-194 Adden-2\Issue Paper - CAG-13-194 (Adden 2)\EMtp structures, provide traffic control assistance as needed, field collection of the data, quality control and proper formatting of the data for ease of loading into the City’s enterprise GIS. Work on the initial scope was successful, including demonstrating efficiencies of methodologies. The APS Phase 2 contract work has collected missing data on 1,372 structures. The actual average cost per structure ($139.53) is 11% less than was estimated for the initial contract budget ($156.74). Field mapping to date includes areas that contained the most concentrated number of structures with missing data. These areas generally followed neighborhood or sub-basin boundaries such as West Kennydale, South Renton, President’s Park and Heather Downs neighborhoods, as well as the Tiffany, Cedar Outfall, Maplewood, and Soos Creek sub-basins (116th Avenue SE, Petrovitsky Road, and Benson Road corridors). Staff has reviewed the GIS data collected to date and identified the remaining known stormwater system structures with missing data that cannot be obtained through available record drawings. APS Surveying and Mapping field survey data collection methodologies and workflow have proven to be effective and efficient. Addendum No. 2 will extend the contract budget and time to complete the field survey and data collection for up to 2209 remaining stormwater system structures within the right-of-way, including structures that may be newly discovered by the project field work. The Surface Water Utility has sufficient funding for Addendum No. 2 to CAG-13-194 in the approved 2015 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program budget. The original scoped fees totaled $191,851. The increased scope costs in the amount of $305,000 increases the total consultant costs from $191,851 to $496,851, with the additional work completed by August 31, 2016. This project is funded from the approved 2015 Surface Water Utility Capital Improvement Program budget 427.475455.018.531.35.41.000. Addendum No. 1 was for a time extension only, extending the expiration date from December 31, 2014 to June 30, 2015. CONCLUSION: Addendum No. 2 is needed to complete data collection on right-of-way stormwater system assets. The Engineering Consultant Agreement with APS Surveying and Mapping in the amount of $305,000 will assist the City in complying with the federal NPDES permit and would be a benefit to customers, developers, engineers, contractors, plan reviewers, City staff and the public. Addendum No. 2 will increase the contract amount from $191,851 to $496,851 and extend the contract schedule to August 31, 2016. cc: Lys Hornsby, Utilities System Director 5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 93 of 247 FORM:ADD-2010ADDENDUMNO.2ENGINEERINGCONSULTANTAGREEMENTFORPROFESSIONALSERVICESforSTORMSYSTEMFIELDMAPPING(Phase2)—NPDESPERMITPROJECT,CAG-13-194ThisAddendumismadeandenteredintothis,dayof__________________byandbetweentheCityofRenton,hereinaftercalledthe“City”,andAPSSURVEY&MAPPING,whoseaddressis13221SE26thStreet,SuiteA,Bellevue,WA98005,hereinaftercalledthe“Consultant”.WITNESSETHTHAT:WHEREAS,theCityengagedtheservicesoftheconsultantunderEngineeringConsultantAgreementCAG-13-194,datedNovember12,2013,toprovideengineeringservicesnecessaryfortheSTORMSYSTEMFIELDMAPPING(Phase2)—NPDESPERMITPROJECT;andWHEREAS,theCitydesirestocompletetheworkassociatedwiththeSTORMSYSTEMFIELDMAPPING(Phase2)—NPDESPERMITPROJECT,andtheCitydoesnothavesufficientqualifiedengineeringemployeestoperformtheworkwithinareasonabletime;andWHEREAS,theCityandconsultanthavedeterminedthatadditionalservicesarerequiredtocompletetheworkitemslistedinExhibitAScopeofServicesundertheoriginalcontractCAG-13-194,datedNovember12,2013;NOW,THEREFORE,inaccordancewithSectionVIIIExtraWorkoftheMasterAgreementCAG-13-194,datedNovember12,2013,itismutuallyagreeduponthatEngineeringConsultantAgreementCAG13-194,isamendedtoincludetheworkandassociatedbudgetasfollows:1.TheScopeofWork(SectionIoftheMasterAgreementCAG-13-194)ismodifiedtoincludetheadditionalservicesontheattachedExhibitA.2.ThePayment(SectionVIoftheMasterAgreementCAG-13-194)ismodifiedtoincludepaymentfortheadditionalworkitemsdefinedinExhibitA.Therevisedcontracttotalpayableforworkonthiscontractaddendumisincreasedfrom$191,851to$496,851,makingadifferenceof$305,000.ThemaximumamountpayablefortheadditionalworkitemsdefinedinExhibitAofthiscontractaddendumis$305,000,withoutpriorauthorizationfromtheCity.3.TheTimeofCompletion(SectionVoftheMasterAgreementCAG-13-194)fortheabovereferencedcontractisextendeduntilAugust31,2016.AllotherprovisionsofConsultantAgreementCAG-13-194datedNovember12,2013,shallapplytothisaddendum.EXECUTION5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 94 of 247 INWITNESSWHEREOF,thepartieshaveexecutedthisAddendumNo.2toENGINEERINGCONSULTANTAGREEMENTCAG-13-194asofthedayandyearfirstabovewritten.i::ANTt.H:\FileSys\SWP-SurfaceWaterProjects\SWP-27-SurfaceWaterProjects(CIP)\27-3472StormMappingProject\PHASEII(FieldCollection)\APSContract2\CAG-13-194Adden-2\AddendumNo2(CAG-13-194).doc\EMtpCITYOFRENTON/Date/L5TypeoPrintNameCTitleMayorDateATTEST:JasonA.Seth,CityClerk5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 95 of 247 EXHIBITAADDENDUMNo.2toCAG-13-194STORMSYSTEMFIELDMAPPING(PHASE2)—NPDESPERMITPROJECTSCOPEOFWORKINTRODUCTION:ThischangeofscopeisAddendumNo.2toMasterAgreementCAG13-194,STORMSYSTEMFIELDMAPPING(Phase2)—NPDESPERMITPROJECT,betweenAPSSurvey&MappingandtheCityofRenton.AddendumNo.2addsadditionalscopetoTask2,additionalbudgettocompleteTask2,andextendstheprojectschedule.CHANGEOFSCOPECollectMissingAttributeData:ThecontractAddendumNo.2addsadditionalstormwaterstructuresfordatacollectionperTask2.AddendumNo.2providesbudgetandscheduletosurveyandcollectdatafor1,749identifiedCitymaintainedstormwaterstructuresandapproximately460stormwaterstructuresthatmaybenewlydiscoveredduringtheproject.TheCitywillprovidetheConsultantwithitsexistingstormwatersystemmapandassetinventory,andhighlightstormwaterstructuresfordatacollectionperAddendumNo.2.Datadeliverableswillincludedigital(pdf)copiesoffieldbookpagesreferencedbyadatafieldwithintherecordfortheassociatedasset(s).AddendumNo.2Budget(maximum$305,000):ThecontractAddendumNo.2providesbudget,nottoexceed$305,000,formappingandcollectingmissingdatafor2,209stormwaterstructures.TheAddendumNo.2budgetisbasedon$137.80perknownstormwaterstructuresand$139percatchbasinstructureforstormwaterstructuresthatmaybenewlydiscoveredduringtheproject.Thecostpercatchbasinincludesallattributesassociatedwithacatchbasin(asdescribedinthemaincontractCAG-13-194Task2,includingconnectingstructures,i.e.pipes)andalldeliverables.ProjectScheduleAmendment:AddendumNo.2extendstheprojectscheduleofcompletiontoAugust31,2016.Page1of1x. n _z:~oucn:oz"._.EmEmsmm2mnoumE>&2a_§zo.N8 _<_m&mq>mqmm3m305. ago».m._.O_..=<_m<m._.m_<_:m_b_<_>.._u_zm3.3mN.I zuomm_.mx_<_:E053._um2<mm: >3m..:<m<m._<_muu_:mman.EmQ22xm_.:o_...>nEm:..E3 zo.N3%mnEEo:m_mnoum 83%N.mn_&:o:m_3%.:8no3u_mHm3%N.m:.__933%Em u_.o_.m2mn_..mac_m. n:>zmmonmnovm no=m2_<__mm.:m>:.ic5mDun: Emnos?mna>nEm:nc3zo.Nmg;mnEEo:m_m.82:<<m:m_.£2558 3.33 no__mn:o:umq3%N.>&m=%3zo.N_u3<amm95%.manmn:mn_:_m3m:_.<m<man no__m233EqRES.3353Q23m_:.8.:mn_.£o_.3<<mnm_,m:._._n.E«m.n.man. muu3x_3m~m_<So?onsémnm?mewcn?camm3%3m<_um_..m<<_<n=mno<m«mQ9==.mEm u_6_.m2.._.EmQ2<<___u_.o<EmEmno:m:_.8_.:<<_Ezmmxwzsmm.8_,3<<m.nm..m<m.nm33%man_mmmm?_:<m:.8..<.man_.._m:__m3m3q3<<m.nm_.m:.:n:.:mm3..38 no__mn:o:uma >&2a_=320.N. Umamn_m__<m_.m_u_mm<3:.:n_cn_m&m_.8_:2532mmo«mm...uooxnmmmmam?mqmznmaa<m 3.8mm_n_2:3:EmB333.Emmmmonazmam....mmE$. >&2=_._3zo.Nwcnmme?._mx_3:3mwowoosu Emno3_.m2>n_am_.a:3zo.N_u_.o<Emmgamma:3 3 mxnmmn_mmomboo..62 Bantamman.no__mnE._m3_mm.:m3:12N\Nommno_.3<<m»m_.m.:.cn.2.=mm.._.:m>n_n_m:Qc3 zo.N 933_mcmmma0:mpmsmoumn_So<<:m..o«3Em»mq m?cn?cammm:n_Bwmum_.nm.8_.. Emu...m~Em.E_.m3..mno_.3<<m.nm_.m?cnncammE23m<am:m<<_<&mno<m«mq n_:_,_:mEm u3_.mn¢Emnoma_um_.88:Emu:_:n_:ammm__mE.__uSmmmmmoamnma<<.Em8.8:.33. Emqmmnzcmq5Em_.:m_:no::.m2n>m-$-m:3%N._:n_c&:mnozzmnzzmm?cn?cqmm. _.m.Emmamanm__qm=<m..mc_mm. _.3_.m2mEmn:_m>3m:n3m:n >Qn_m:n_:32o.NmxamsamEm_u_.o_.m2mEma:_mQ.no3_u_m:o:3 Nopm. mx_.=w=> >oomzoc_<_20.N8 n>m-$-$._ m._.O_~_<_m<m._.m_<__n_m_.o_s>_._._zm =._._>mmN.I zvom...Eng:.5032 <<O_~_A _ow5e. - Utility Systems Division recommends approval of Addendum No. 2 to contract Page 96 of 247 CITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTONORDINANCENO.ANORDINANCEOFTHECITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTON,AMENDINGSECTION1-3-2,OFCHAPTER3,REMEDIESANDPENALTIES,OFTITLEI(ADMINISTRATIVE),SECTIONS4-3-050AND4-3-120OFCHAPTER3,ENVIRONMENTALREGULATIONSANDOVERLAYDISTRICTS,SECTION4-8-120OFCHAPTER8,PERMITS—GENERALANDAPPEALS,SECTION4-9-250OFCHAPTER9,PERMITS—SPECIFIC,ANDSECTIONS4-11-040,4-11-190AND4-11-230,OFCHAPTER11,DEFiNITIONS,OFTITLEIV(DEVELOPMENTREGULATIONS)OFTHERENTONMUNICIPALCODE,BYUPDATINGTHECITY’SCRITICALAREASREGULATIONS,INCLUDINGREPEALINGTHECURRENTLANGUAGEIN4-3-050ANDADOPTINGNEWLANGUAGE,REVISINGCERTAINDEFINITIONS,ANDMAKINGCERTAINVIOLATIONSOFTITLEIVCIVILINFRACTIONS.THECITYCOUNCILOFTHECITYOFRENTON,WASHINGTON,DOESORDAINASFOLLOWS:SECTIONI.Subsection1-3-2.A.1,CodeViolations,ofChapter3,RemediesandPenalties,ofTitleI(Administrative)oftheRentonMunicipalCode,isherebyamendedasfollows:1.CodeViolations:ViolationsofRMCChapters4-2(ZoningDistricts—UsesandStandards),4-3(EnvironmentalRegulationsandOverlayDistricts,exceptasitrelatestoAdultRetailandEntertainment,CriticalArea,andShorelineMasterProgramRcgulations),4-4(City-WidePropertyDevelopmentStandards),4-5(BuildingandFirePreventionStandards,exceptasitrelatestomulti-familyhomes),4-6(StreetandUtilityStandards),4-9(Permits—Specific),4-10(LegalNonconformingStructures,UsesandLots),5-5(BusinessLicenses),8-2(StormAndSurfaceWaterDrainage),8-4(Water),8-5(Sewers),8-7(Noise13% n_._.<omxmzaoz.<<>m_.__2m._.Oz o_6_2>znm20. >2o_6_z>znmon._._._mn_._.<O."xmzqoz.<<>m_.=2m._.O2.>_<_m20_2m mmndoz H-w-N.onn_._>3mxw.xm_<_m0_mm>20_um2>_.._._mm.on._._._._.m_ .>c_<__z_.?x>:<£. mmndozma-w-omo>203.3aonn_._>_..4mww.m2<:aO2_<_m2._.>_. xmmcrpdozm>20o<mx_.><0_m._.x_n._.m.mmndoz3-5a O."n:>3mx m. _.mw_<_:mIomzmm>_.>20>2.m>_.m.mmndoz._-m-~.n.oomn:>3mw m._.mx_<_:.m Im_.mn_:n.>20mmndozmh-HH-oAo.a-S-$o>20»-S-~wo.O."n_._>3mx H... omzziozm.on._._._.rm_<Em<m_.o_.._<_mz4xmmc_.>:ozm.O."._._._mzmzqoz _<_cz_n__.>rnoom.3C_u0>._._2m.:._mn:<....nw:_n>_.>xm>mxmmcc?ozm. _znEo_zmxm_.m>_._zm._._._mncnxmza_.>zmc>mm_2._-.u.-omo>20 503.29 252_.>zmc>mm.xm<_m_zmnmx._.>_20m_u_2_._._O2m.>20_<_>_azm nmw._.>_2 <_o_.>:ozmon._._._._.m_<n_<=._z§>n:ozm. ._.Imn_._.<8:29on.:._mn_._.<ommmz._.Oz.<<>m_.__2m._.Oz.commoxu>_z >m 1oPo<<w mmndoz_.mc_u.n.mn:o:H-w-~.>.H.no.3<.o_m:o:M22522 w._.;.m3mq_mm2:. vm:m_:m.n..9.._.:_m_ A>n_3.:_m.:.m:<£9“9mma?a:_<_::_n._um_may a 333 mamaqmq mm +o__o<<m_ H.9%<.o_m:o:m”<_o_m2o:m9.x_<_n25.033Ah?os?m _u_.£:n$I cmmmmamm$:n_m&$.3:m:<:o:3m_..$_xmmamzosmm:n_O<m:m<_u_m3n.a: mxnmu?mm:$_m.Bm3>n__.__H_»m.8._magm:nm2m_:3m:».he.An_.2-<<am_u_.oum3<0m<m_o_u3m:.n m.8:n_m&&.3:w:__n__:mmag23_u_,m<m::o:m.8:am_dm.mxnmu?mm:3_m.8m .8 3c_:-33=<:o_.:m$.3Am?mm?magc:_:<m8:n_m3_&.3:um_.3_.aI mumnia. Eo:.mmm_zo.§1233mm?c?cqmm.cmmmmam_.o5.m-mAwcmimmmEnmsmmmrm- N>3mclmnm<<m.8q0_.m_:mm£.mg..<<m.:...;.maAmmémav.my 222%7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 97 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 2 Level Regulations), 9‐8 (Sidewalk Construction) and 9‐10 (Street Excavations), shall be considered civil code violations under this Section. SECTION II. Section 4‐3‐050, Critical Areas Regulations, of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby repealed in its entirety and replaced with the following language: 4‐3‐050 CRITICAL AREAS REGULATIONS: A. PURPOSE: The purposes of this section are to: 1. Manage development activities to protect environmental quality, promote diversity of species, and habitat within the City; 2. Ensure that activities in or affecting critical areas do not threaten public safety, cause nuisances, or destroy or degrade critical area functions and values; 3. Prevent the loss of critical area acreage and functions and strive for a net gain over present conditions through restoration where feasible; 4. Assist or further the implementation of the policies of the Growth Management Act, the State Environmental Policy Act, and the City Comprehensive Plan; 5. Provide City officials with information to evaluate, approve, condition or deny public or private development proposals with regard to critical area impacts; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 98 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 3 6. Protect the public life, health, safety, welfare, and property by minimizing and managing the adverse environmental impacts of development within and abutting critical areas; 7. Protect the public from: a. Avoidable monetary losses due to maintenance and replacement of public facilities and utilities, property damage, public mitigation of avoidable impacts, and public emergency rescue and relief operations; and b. Potential litigation on improper construction practices occurring in critical areas; 8. Reduce the potential for damage to life and property from abandoned coal mines, and return the land to productive uses; 9. Maintain, to the extent practicable, a stable tax base by providing for the sound use and development of areas of flood hazard areas so as to minimize future flood blight areas; and 10. Protect riparian habitat in order to provide for bank and channel stability, sustained water supply, flood storage, recruitment of woody debris, leaf litter, nutrients, sediment and pollutant filtering, shade, shelter, and other functions that are important to both fish and wildlife. B. APPLICABILITY: 1. Lands to Which These Regulations Apply and Non‐regulated Lands: The following critical areas are regulated by this section. Multiple development 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 99 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 4 standards may apply to a site feature based upon overlapping critical area(s) and/or critical area classifications: a. Flood hazard areas. b. Steep slopes (must have a minimum vertical rise of fifteen feet (15’)), landslide hazards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards or on sites within fifty feet (50’) of steep slopes, landslide hazards, erosion hazards, seismic hazards, and/or coal mine hazards classified under RMC 4‐3‐050.G.5.a which are located on abutting or adjacent sites. c. Habitat Conservation Areas. d. Streams and Lakes. All applicable requirements of this section apply to Class F, Np, and Ns water bodies, as defined in subsection F.7 of these regulations or on sites within one hundred feet (100’) of Class F, Np, and Ns water bodies, except Type S water bodies, inventoried as “Shorelines of the State”, are not subject to this section, and are regulated in RMC 4‐3‐090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, and RMC 4‐9‐197, Shoreline Permits. e. Wellhead Protection Areas. f. Wetlands, Categories I, II, III, and IV or on sites within two hundred feet (200’) of Category I, II, III, and IV wetlands. Wetlands created or restored as a part of a mitigation project are regulated wetlands. Regulated wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass‐lined swales, canals, detention facilities, 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 100 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 5 wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. g. Sites Separated from Critical Areas, Nonregulated: As determined by the Administrator, these regulations may not apply to development proposed on sites that are separated from critical areas by pre‐ existing, intervening, and lawfully created structures, roads, or other substantial existing improvements. For the purposes of this section, the intervening lots/parcels, roads, or other substantial improvements shall be found to: i. Separate the subject upland property from the critical area due to their height or width; and ii. Substantially prevent or impair delivery of most functions from the subject upland property to the critical area. Such determination and evidence shall be included in the application file. Public notification shall be given as follows: i. For applications that are not subject to notices of application pursuant to Chapter 4‐8 RMC, notice of the buffer determination shall be given by posting the site and notifying parties of record, if any, in accordance with Chapter 4‐8 RMC. ii. For applications that are subject to notices of application, the buffer determination or request for determination shall be included with notice 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 101 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 6 of application. Upon determination, notification of parties of record, if any, shall be made. 2. Activities to Which These Regulations Apply: The provisions of this section shall apply to any regulated activity that potentially affects a critical area or its buffer unless otherwise exempted by these regulations. Where a regulated activity would be partly within and partly outside a critical area or its buffer, the entire activity shall be reviewed pursuant to the requirements of this section. Applicable activities are as follows: a. Removing, excavating, disturbing, or dredging soil, sand, gravel, minerals, organic matter or materials of any kind. b. Dumping, discharging, or filling with any material. c. Draining, flooding, or disturbing the water level or water table, or diverting or impeding water flow. d. Driving pilings or placing obstructions. e. Constructing, substantially reconstructing, demolishing, or altering the size of any structure or infrastructure. f. Destroying or altering vegetation through clearing, grading, harvesting, shading, or planting vegetation that would negatively affect the character of a critical area. g. Changing, significantly, water temperature, physical or chemical characteristics of water sources, including quantity and pollutants by any activity. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 102 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 7 h. Affecting, potentially, a critical area or buffer by any other activity not otherwise exempt from the provisions of this section as determined by the department. C. EXEMPT, PROHIBITED AND NONCONFORMING ACTIVITIES: 1. Permit Required: a. Development or Alteration: Prior to any development or alteration of a property containing a critical area as defined in RMC 4‐3‐050.B, entitled Applicability, the owner or designee must obtain a development permit, critical area permit, and/or letter of exemption. No separate critical area permit is required for a development proposal which requires development permits or which has received a letter of exemption. b. Operating and Closure Permits ‐ Wellhead Protection Areas: Wellhead Protection Areas operating permit and closure permit requirements are contained in RMC 4‐9‐015, Wellhead Protection Areas Permits. 2. Letter of Exemption: a. Flood Hazard Areas, Geologically Hazardous Areas, Habitat Conservation Areas, Streams and Lakes, Wellhead Protection Areas, Wetlands: Except in the case of public emergencies, all other exemptions in RMC 4‐3‐050.C may require that a letter of exemption be obtained from the Administrator prior to construction or initiation of activities. b. Applicability of Requirements to Exempt Activities: Exempt activities provided with a letter of exemption may intrude into the critical area or 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 103 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 8 required buffer subject to any listed conditions or requirements. Exempt activities do not need to comply with mitigation ratios of RMC 4‐3‐050.J unless required in exemption criteria. c. Reports and Mitigation Plans Required: A critical area report, and/or enhancement or mitigation plan shall be required pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐ 050.F and 4‐3‐050.L., unless otherwise waived by the Administrator. d. Administrator Findings: In determining whether to issue a letter of exemption for activities listed in RMC 4‐3‐050.C, the Administrator shall find that: i. The activity is not prohibited by this or any other provision of the Renton Municipal Code or State or Federal law or regulation; ii. The activity will be conducted using best management practices as specified by industry standards or applicable Federal agencies or scientific principles; iii. Impacts are minimized and, where applicable, disturbed areas are immediately restored; iv. Where water body or buffer disturbance has occurred in accordance with an exemption during construction or other activities, revegetation with native vegetation shall be required; v. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Administrator may require compliance with the 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 104 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 9 Wellhead Protection Area requirements of this section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material, activity, and/or facility. Such determinations will be based upon site and/or chemical‐specific data. 3. Exemptions – Critical Areas and Buffers: Exempt activities are listed in the following table. If an “X” appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified critical area and required buffer. If an “X” does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the particular critical area or required buffer. Where utilized in the following table the term “restoration” means returning the subject area back to its original state or better following the performance of the exempt activity. Activities taking place in critical areas and their associated buffers and listed in the following table are exempt from the applicable provisions of this section, provided a letter of exemption has been issued. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of Chapters 4‐8 and 4‐9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. EXEMPT ACTIVITIES – PERMITTED WITHIN CRITICAL AREAS AND ASSOCIATED BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Flood Hazard Areas Geologic Hazard Area Habitat Conservation Area Streams and Lakes: Type F, Np, & Ns Wellhead Protection Areas Wetlands a. Conservation, Enhancement, Education and Related Activities: i. Natural Resource/Habitat Conservation or Preservation2 X X X X X1 X 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 105 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 10 ii. Enhancement activities as defined in Chapter 4‐11 RMC. X X X X X iii. Approved Restoration/Mitigation3 X X X X X1 X b. Research and Site Investigation: i. Nondestructive Education and Research. X X X X X1 X ii. Site Investigative Work4 X X X X X1 X c. Agricultural, Harvesting, Vegetation Management: i. Harvesting Wild Foods5 X X X X X1 X ii. Existing/Ongoing Agricultural Activities6 X X X X X iii. Dangerous Trees7 X X X X8 X1 X8 d. Surface Water: i. New Surface Water Discharges9 X X X ii. Modification of existing Regional Stormwater Facilities10 X iii. Flood Hazard Areas Reduction11 X X iv. Storm Drainage Piping12 X e. Roads, Parks, Public and Private Utilities18: i. Relocation of Existing Utilities out of Critical Area and Buffer13 X X X X X1 X ii. New trails, existing Parks, Trails, Roads, Facilities, and Utilities – Maintenance, Operation, Repair, and the Construction of New Trails14 X X X X 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 106 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 11 iii. Utilities, Traffic Control, Walkways, Bikeways Within Existing, Improved Right‐of‐Way or Easements15 X X X X iv. Modification of Existing Utilities and Streets by Ten Percent (10%) or Less16 X X17 X17 f. Temporary Wetland Impacts: i. Temporary Wetland Impacts19 X X g. Maintenance and Construction – Existing Uses and Facilities: i. Remodeling, Replacing, Removing Existing Structures, Facilities, and Improvements20 X X X X ii. Maintenance and Repair – Any Existing Public or Private Use21 X X X X iii. Modification of an Existing Single Family Dwelling22 X X X X iv. Existing Activities23 X X X X X h. Emergency Activities: i. Emergency Activities24, 25, 26, 27 X X X X X1 X i. Hazardous Materials: i. Federal or State Preemption28 X1 ii. Use of Materials with No Risk29 X1 Footnotes: 1. If a hazardous material, activity, and/or facility that is exempt pursuant to this section has a significant or substantial potential to degrade groundwater quality, then the Administrator may require compliance with the Wellhead Protection 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 107 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 12 Area requirements of this section otherwise relevant to that hazardous material activity and/or facility. 2. Conservation or preservation of soil, water, vegetation, fish and other wildlife. 3. Any critical area and/or buffer restoration or other mitigation activities which have been approved by the City. 4. Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests and other related activities. Investigative work shall not disturb any more than five percent (5%) of the critical area and required buffer. In every case, impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be immediately restored at a one to one (1:1) ratio. 5. The harvesting of wild foods in a manner that is not injurious to natural reproduction of such foods and provided the harvesting does not require tilling of soil, planting of crops or alteration of the critical area. 6. Existing and ongoing agricultural activities including farming, horticulture, aquaculture and/or maintenance of existing irrigation systems. Activities on areas lying fallow as part of a conventional rotational cycle are part of an ongoing operation; provided, that the agricultural activity must have been conducted within the last five (5) years. Activities that bring a critical area into agricultural use are not part of an ongoing operation. Maintenance of existing legally installed irrigation, ditch and pipe systems is allowed; new or expanded irrigation, ditch, outfall or other systems are not exempt. If it is necessary to reduce the impacts of agricultural practices to critical areas, a farm management plan may be required based on the King County Conservation District’s Farm Conservation and Practice Standards, or other best management practices. 7. Removal of non‐native invasive ground cover or weeds listed by King County Noxious Weed Board or other government agency or dangerous trees, as defined in Chapter 4‐11 RMC which have been approved by the City and certified dangerous by a licensed landscape architect, or certified arborist, selection of whom to be approved by the City based on the type of information required. 8. Limited to cutting of dangerous trees; such hazardous trees shall be retained as large woody debris in critical areas and/or associated buffers, where feasible. 9. New surface water discharges in the form of dispersion trenches, outfalls and bioswales are allowed within the outer twenty‐five percent (25%) of the buffer of a Category III or IV wetland only provided that: the discharge meets the requirements of the Storm and Surface Water Drainage Regulations (RMC 4‐6‐ 030); no other location is feasible; and will not degrade the functions or values of the wetland or stream. Where differences exist between these regulations and RMC 4‐6‐030, these regulations will take precedence. 10. Modifications to existing regional stormwater management facilities operated and maintained under the direction of the City Surface Water Utility that are designed 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 108 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 13 consistent with the current version of the Washington State Department of Ecology Wetlands and Stormwater Management Guidelines or meeting equivalent objectives. 11. Implementation of public flood hazard areas reduction and public surface water projects, where habitat enhancement and restoration at a one to one (1:1) ratio are provided, and appropriate Federal and/or State authorization has been received. 12. Installation of new storm drainage lines in any geologic hazard area when a geotechnical report clearly demonstrates that the installation would comply with the criteria listed in RMC 4‐3‐050.J.3 and that the installation would be consistent with each of the purposes of the critical area regulations listed in RMC 4‐3‐050.A. Also, to qualify for the exemption, the report must propose appropriate mitigation for any potential impacts identified in the report. 13. Relocation out of critical areas and required buffers of natural gas, cable, communication, telephone and electric facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment and appurtenances (not including substations), with an associated voltage of fifty five thousand (55,000) volts or less, only when required by a local governmental agency, and with the approval of the City. Disturbed areas shall be restored. 14. Normal and routine maintenance, operation and repair of existing parks and trails, or the construction of new trails, streets, roads, rights‐of‐way and associated appurtenances, facilities and utilities where no alteration or additional fill materials will be placed other than the minimum alteration and/or fill needed to restore those facilities or to construct new trails to meet established safety standards. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility structures and rights‐of‐way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. 15. Within existing and improved public road rights‐of‐way or easements, installation, construction, replacement, operation, overbuilding or alteration of all natural gas, cable, communication, telephone and electric facilities, lines, pipes, mains, equipment or appurtenances, traffic control devices, illumination, walkways and bikeways. If activities exceed the existing improved area or the public right‐of‐ way, this exemption does not apply. Where applicable, restoration of disturbed areas shall be completed. 16. Overbuilding (enlargement beyond existing project needs) or replacement of existing utility systems and replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing streets, provided: a. The work does not increase the footprint of the structure, line or street by 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 109 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 14 more than ten percent (10%) within the critical area and/or buffer areas, and occurs in the existing right‐of‐way boundary or easement boundary. b. Restoration shall be conducted where feasible. Compensation for impacts to buffers shall include enhancement of the remaining buffer area along the impacted area where there is enhancement opportunity. c. The Administrator determines that, based on best judgment, a person would not: (i) be able to meaningfully measure, detect, or evaluate insignificant effects; or (ii) expect discountable effects to occur. d. This exemption allows for ten percent (10%) maximum expansion total, life of the project. After the ten percent (10%) expansion cap is reached, future improvements are subject to all applicable provisions of this section. 17. Exemption is not allowed in Category I wetlands. 18. Maintenance activities, including routine vegetation management and essential tree removal, and removal of non‐native invasive vegetation or weeds listed by the King County Noxious Weed Board or other government agency, for public and private utilities, road rights‐of‐way and easements, and parks. 19. Temporary disturbances of a wetland due to construction activities that do not include permanent filling may be permitted; provided, that there are no permanent adverse impacts to the critical area or required buffer, and areas temporarily disturbed are restored at a one to one (1:1) ratio. Category I wetlands and Category II forested wetlands shall be enhanced at a two to one (2:1) ratio in addition to being restored. For Habitat Conservation Areas, this exemption applies only to Category I wetlands. 20. Remodeling, restoring, replacing or removing structures, facilities and other improvements in existence or vested on the date this section becomes effective and that do not meet the setback or buffer requirements of this section provided the work complies with the criteria in RMC 4‐10‐090. 21. Normal and routine maintenance and repair of any existing public or private uses and facilities where no alteration of the critical area and required buffer or additional fill materials will be placed. The use of heavy construction equipment shall be limited to utilities and public agencies that require this type of equipment for normal and routine maintenance and repair of existing utility or public structures and rights‐of‐way. In every case, critical area and required buffer impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas shall be restored during and immediately after the use of construction equipment. 22. Additions and alterations of an existing single family residence and/or garage (attached or detached); provided, that the addition/alteration does not increase the footprint of the structure lying within the critical area or buffer; and provided, that no portion of the addition/alteration occurs closer to the critical area or required buffers than the existing structure unless the structure or addition can 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 110 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 15 meet required buffers. Existing or rebuilt accessory structures associated with single family dwelling and rebuilt with the same footprint such as fences, gazebos, storage sheds, and play houses are exempt from this section. New accessory structures may be allowed when associated with single family dwellings such as fences, gazebos, storage sheds, play houses and when built on and located in a previously legally altered area. 23. Existing activities which have not been changed, expanded or altered, provided they comply with the applicable requirements of chapter 4‐10 RMC. 24. Emergency activities are those which are undertaken to correct emergencies that threaten the public health, safety and welfare. An emergency means that an action must be undertaken immediately or within a time frame too short to allow full compliance with this section, to avoid an immediate threat to public health or safety, to prevent an imminent danger to public or private property, or to prevent an imminent threat of serious environmental degradation. 25. Emergency tree and/or ground cover removal by any City department or agency and/or public or private utility involving immediate danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. 26. Emergency activities in Wellhead Protection Areas: Public interest emergency use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials by governmental organizations. 27. Temporary emergency exemptions shall be used only in extreme cases and not to justify poor planning by an agency or applicant. Issuance of an emergency permit by the City does not preclude the necessity to obtain necessary approvals from appropriate Federal and State authorities. Notwithstanding the provisions of this section or any other City laws to the contrary, the Administrator may issue a temporary emergency exemption letter if the action meets the requirements: a. An unacceptable threat to life or severe loss of property will occur if an emergency permit is not granted; b. The anticipated threat or loss may occur before a permit can be issued or modified under the procedures otherwise required by this section and other applicable laws; c. Any emergency exemption letter granted shall incorporate, to the greatest extent practicable and feasible but not inconsistent with the emergency situation, the standards and criteria required for nonemergency activities under this section. The emergency exemption shall be consistent with the following procedural and time requirements: a. The emergency shall be limited in duration to the time required to complete the authorized emergency activity; provided, that no emergency permit be granted for a period exceeding ninety (90) days except as 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 111 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 16 specified in RMC 4‐3‐050.C. b. Any critical area altered as a result of the emergency activity must be restored within the ninety (90) day period, except that if more than ninety (90) days from the issuance of the emergency permit is required to complete restoration, the emergency permit may be extended to complete this restoration. For the purposes of this paragraph, restoration means returning the affected area to its state prior to the performance of the emergency activity. c. Notice of the issuance of the emergency permit and request for public comments shall be posted at the affected site(s) and City Hall no later than ten (10) days after the issuance of the emergency permit. If significant comments are received, the City may reconsider the permit. d. Expiration of Exemption Authorization: The emergency exemption authorization may be terminated at any time without process upon a determination by the Administrator that the action was not or is no longer necessary to protect human health or the environment. 28. Cleanups, monitoring and/or studies undertaken under supervision of the Washington Department of Ecology or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 29. Use, storage, and handling of specific hazardous materials that do not present a risk to the aquifer as determined and listed by the Department. 4. Exemptions – in Buffers Only: The activities listed in the following table are allowed within critical area buffers, and are exempt from the applicable provisions of this section, provided a letter of exemption has been issued pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.C. If an “X” appears in a box, the listed exemption applies in the specified buffer. If an “X” does not appear in a box, then the exemption does not apply in the required buffer. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of Chapters 4‐8 and 4‐9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. EXEMPTIONS WITHIN CRITICAL AREA BUFFERS EXEMPT ACTIVITY Flood Hazard Geologi c Habitat Conservatio Streams and Wellhead Protectio Wetlands 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 112 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 17 Areas Hazard Area n Areas Lakes: Types F, Np, & Ns n Areas a. Activities in Critical Area Buffers: i. Trails and Open Space1 X X X X ii. Stormwater Treatment and Flow Control Facilities in Buffer2 X iii. Stormwater Conveyance in Buffer3 X X X Footnotes: 1. Walkways and trails, and associated open space in critical area buffers located on public property, or where easements or agreements have been granted for such purposes on private property. All of the following criteria shall be met: a. The trail, walkway, and associated open space shall be consistent with the Parks, Recreation, and Natural Areas Plan. The City may allow private trails as part of the approval of a site plan, subdivision or other land use permit approvals. b. Trails and walkways shall be located in the outer twenty‐five percent (25%) of the buffer, i.e., the portion of the buffer that is farther away from the critical area. Exceptions to this requirement may be made for: i. Trail segments connecting to existing trails where an alternate alignment is not practical. ii. Public access points to water bodies spaced periodically along the trail. c. Enhancement of the buffer area is required where trails are located in the buffer. Where enhancement of the buffer area abutting a trail is not feasible due to existing high quality vegetation, additional buffer area or other mitigation may be required. d. Trail widths shall be a maximum width of twelve feet (12’). Trails shall be constructed of permeable materials which protect water quality, allow adequate surface water and ground water movements, do not contribute to erosion, are located where they do not disturb nesting, breeding, and rearing areas, and designed to avoid or reduce the removal of trees. Impervious materials may be allowed if pavement is required for handicapped or emergency access, or safety, or is a designated nonmotorized transportation route or makes a connection to an already dedicated trail, or reduces potential for other environmental impacts. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 113 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 18 e. Any crossing over a stream or wetland shall be generally perpendicular to the critical area and shall be accomplished by bridging or other technique designed to minimize critical area disturbance. It shall also be the minimum width necessary to accommodate the intended function or objective. 2. Stormwater management facilities shall not be built within a critical area buffer except as allowed in Reference 5, Wetlands Protection Guidelines of the City’s Surface Water Design Manual and shall require buffer enhancement or buffer averaging when they are sited in areas of forest vegetation, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.G.2, and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities. 3. Necessary conveyance systems including stormwater dispersion outfall systems designed to minimize impacts to the buffer and critical area, where the site topography requires their location within the buffer to allow hydraulic function, provided the standard buffer zone area associated with the critical area classification is retained pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.G.2, and is sited to reduce impacts between the critical area and surrounding activities. 5. Prohibited Activities: Prohibited activities are identified below for each critical area governed by this section. No action shall be taken by any person, company, agency, or applicant which results in any alteration of a critical area except as consistent with the purpose, objectives, and requirements of this section. a. Floodways: Encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, unless it meets the provisions of RMC 4‐3‐050.G.4.e, Additional Restrictions within Floodways. b. Streams/Lakes and Wetlands: Grazing of animals is not allowed within a stream, lake, wetland or their associated buffers. c. Wellhead Protection Areas: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 114 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 19 i. All Wellhead Protection Areas ‐ Pesticides and Fertilizers: The application of hazardous materials such as pesticides or fertilizers containing nitrates within one hundred feet (100’) of a well or two hundred feet (200’) of a spring. ii. Zone 1, as identified in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8: (a) Changes in land use and types of new facilities in which any of the following will be on the premises: (1) More than five hundred (500) gallons of hazardous material; (2) More than one hundred fifty (150) gallons of hazardous material in containers that are opened and handled; (3) Containers exceeding five (5) gallons in size; or (4) Tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry‐cleaning fluid). (b) Surface impoundments (as defined in Chapters 173‐303 and 173‐304 WAC); (c) Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; (d) All types of landfills, including solid waste landfills; (e) Transfer stations; (f) Septic systems; (g) Recycling facilities that handle hazardous materials; (h) Underground hazardous material storage and/or distribution facilities; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 115 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 20 (i) New heating systems using fuel oil except for commercial uses when the source of fuel oil is an existing above‐ground waste oil storage tank; (j) Petroleum product pipelines; (k) Hazardous materials use on the site in quantities greater than that allowed for new facilities as provided in item a, changes in land use and types of new facilities, of this subsection, once a facility is closed, relocated, or the use of hazardous materials is terminated, reinstatement of the use of hazardous materials shall be prohibited; (l) Facility closure, sale, transfer or temporary or permanent abandonment in a Wellhead Protection Area without complying with the requirements of RMC 4‐9‐015.F, Closure Permit, and permit conditions of this section; and (m) Facility changes in operations that increases the aggregate quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced with the following exception: An increase in the quantity of hazardous materials is allowed up to the amount allowed for a new facility as provided by in item a, changes in land use and types of new facilities, of this subsection. iii. Zone 2, as identified in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8: (a) Surface impoundments (as defined in Chapters 173‐303 and 173‐304 WAC); (b) Recycling facilities that handle hazardous materials; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 116 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 21 (c) Hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; (d) Solid waste landfills; (e) Transfer stations; (f) New heating systems using fuel oil stored in underground storage tanks; and (g) Petroleum product pipelines. iv. Zone 1 Modified, as identified in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8: The prohibitions of Zone 1 Modified are the same as Zone 1 with the exceptions as follows: (a) Hazardous Materials Inventory: Existing facilities are not subject to the five hundred (500) gallons maximum hazardous material quantity limitation in Zone 1 and therefore don’t have to reduce inventory or relocate. Proposed facilities are subject to the maximum quantity. (b) Septic Tanks: Existing septic tanks are allowed to remain and new septic tanks are allowed if City sewers are not available. (c) Surface Water Management: Infiltration of runoff is allowed and pipe materials are not subject to Zone 1 specifications. (d) Site Improvements: An existing facility that was in compliance with improvements required at the installation of the facility is not subject to new site improvements (groundwater monitoring, paving, runoff control, etc.). 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 117 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 22 6. Nonconforming Activities or Structures: Regulated activities legally in existence prior to the passage of this section, but which are not in conformity with the provisions of this section are subject to the provisions of RMC 4‐10‐090, Critical Areas Regulations – Nonconforming Activities and Structures. D. ADMINISTRATION AND INTERPRETATION: 1. Interpretation: The Administrator shall have the power to render interpretations of this section and to adopt and enforce rules and regulations supplemental to this section as he/she may deem necessary in order to clarify the application of the provisions of this code. Such interpretations, rules and regulations shall be in conformity with the intent and purpose of this section. Provisions contained within this section are considered the minimum requirements and will not limit or repeal other provisions under state statute. a. Relationship to Other Agencies and Regulations: i. These critical areas regulations shall be in addition to zoning and other regulations adopted by the City. Compliance with other regulations does not exempt the applicant from critical areas regulations. In the event of any conflict between these regulations and any other City regulations, those regulations which provide the greater protection to critical areas shall apply. ii. Any individual critical area adjoined by another type of critical area shall have the buffer and meet the requirements that provide the most protection to the critical areas involved. When any provision of this section or any existing regulation, or easement, covenant, or deed restriction granted to 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 118 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 23 any governmental body conflicts with this section, that which provides more protection to the critical areas shall apply. iii. Compliance with the provisions of this section does not constitute compliance with other federal, State, and local regulations and permit requirements that may be required (for example, shoreline substantial development or conditional use permits, shoreline variances, the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife hydraulic project approval (HPA), Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permits, Department of Ecology 401 Water Quality Certifications and National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits). The applicant is responsible for complying with these requirements, apart from the process established in this section. 2. Duties of Administrator: The Administrator shall have the power and authority to issue decisions relative to and enforce the provisions of this section. a. Compliance: The City shall not grant any approval or permit any regulated activity in a critical area or associated buffer prior to fulfilling the requirements of this section. b. Review: The Administrator shall review all development permits to determine that the requirements of this section have been satisfied. c. Finding of Conformance Required: Conformance with these critical area regulations shall be a finding in any approval of a development permit or aquifer protection area permit, and such finding shall be documented in writing in the project file. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 119 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 24 3. Flood Hazard Areas: Information to be Provided by Applicant: The applicant shall provide the Administrator the following information: i. The actual elevation, in relation to mean sea level, the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88), of the lowest floor (including basement) of all new or substantially improved structures, and whether or not the structure contains a basement where base flood elevation data is provided through the flood insurance study or required. . ii. For all new or substantially improved floodproofed structures: (a) The applicant shall verify and have recorded the actual elevation in relation to mean sea level, the North American Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88); and (b) Flood elevation certificates shall be submitted by an applicant to the Development Services Division prior to the building’s finished floor construction. Finished floor elevation should be verified by a preconstruction elevation certificate at the time of construction of a substantial structural element of the finished floor (i.e., foundation form for the concrete floor). An as‐built elevation certificate will be provided prior to issuance of final occupancy. 4. Wellhead Protection Areas: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 120 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 25 a. Annual Inspections: All permitted facilities in a Wellhead Protection Area will be subject to a minimum of one (1) inspection per year by a Department inspector. b. Potential to Degrade Groundwater – Zone 2: i. Potential for Impacts Equal to Facility in Zone 1: If the Administrator determines that an existing or proposed facility located in Zone 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area has a potential to degrade groundwater quality which equals or exceeds that of a permitted facility in Zone 1, then the Administrator may require that facility to fully comply with requirements for Zone 1 contained in RMC 4‐3‐050.C.5.d,and RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.. ii. Criteria: Criteria used to make the determination in RMC 4‐3‐ 050.D.4, shall include but not be limited to the present and past activities conducted at the facility; types and quantities of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used or produced; the potential for the activities or hazardous materials to degrade groundwater quality; history of spills at the site, and presence of contamination on site. c. Finding of Conformance Required ‐ Wellhead Protection Areas: No changes in land use shall be allowed nor shall permits for development be issued if the Department finds that the proposed land use, activity, or business is likely to impact the long‐term, short‐term or cumulative quality of the aquifer. The finding shall be based on the present or past activities conducted at the site; hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used or produced; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 121 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 26 the potential for the land use, activity, or business to degrade groundwater quality. 5. Review Authority: The Administrator shall have the authority to interpret, apply, and enforce this section to accomplish the stated purpose. Based upon site specific review and analysis, the City may withhold, condition, or deny development permits or activity approvals to ensure that the proposed action is consistent with this section a. General: The Administrator is authorized to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: i. Issue a critical areas permit for proposals not otherwise requiring a development permit. ii. Issue written letters of exemption. iii. Allow temporary emergency exemptions. iv. Interpret critical areas regulations. v. Approve the use of alternates in accordance with RMC 4‐9‐ 250.E. vi. Waive report content or submittal requirements provided criteria to waive studies are met. vii. Grant administrative variances to those specified code sections listed in RMC 4‐9‐250.B. viii. Require tests for proof of compliance. ix. Grant modifications pursuant to RMC 4‐9‐250.D. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 122 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 27 b. Conditions of Approval: The Administrator is authorized, through conditions of approval, to modify the proposal, including, but not limited to, construction techniques, design, drainage, project size/configuration, or seasonal constraints on development. Upon review of a special study, the development permit shall be conditioned to mitigate adverse environmental impacts and to assure that the development can be safely accommodated on the site and is consistent with the purposes of this section. A mitigation plan may be required consistent with RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1. c. Geologically Hazardous Areas, Habitat Conservation Areas, Streams and Lakes, and Wetlands: The Administrator is authorized, pursuant to subsection H, entitled Alterations To Critical Areas And/Or Buffers – General Requirements, to make the following administrative allowances and determinations: i. Geologically Hazardous Areas. (a) Waive independent review of geotechnical reports. (b) Increase or decrease required buffer for very high landslide hazard areas. (c) Grant a modification for created slopes. ii. Streams and Lakes: (a) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions. (b) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging. iv. Wellhead Protection Areas: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 123 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 28 (a) Issue operating and closure permits. (b) Determine pipeline requirements. (c) Determine if Zone 1 requirements should apply in Zone 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area. v. Wetlands: (a) Determine whether wetlands are unregulated. (b) Extend the valid period of a wetland delineation. (c) Approve proposals for buffer width reductions of up to twenty‐five percent (25%). (d) Approve proposals for buffer width averaging. (e) Authorize other category level for created or restored wetlands. (f) Waive requirements of this section upon determination that all impacts on wetlands would be mitigated as part of an approved area‐ wide wetlands plan that, when taken as a whole over an approved schedule or staging of plan implementation, will meet or exceed the requirements of this section. E. MAPS: 1. Maps Show Approximate Location of Critical Areas: The approximate location and extent of critical areas within the City are shown on the critical areas inventory maps. The City supports a website, Maps and GIS Data, which supports mapping applications, a map gallery, and downloadable GIS data. These 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 124 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 29 maps shall be used for informational purposes and as a general guide only, for the assistance of property owners and other interested parties; the boundaries and locations shown are generalized. The actual presence or absence, type, extent, boundaries, and classification of critical areas on a specific site shall be identified in the field by a qualified consultant and confirmed by the Department, according to the procedures, definitions, and criteria established by this section. In the event of any conflict between the critical area location or designation shown on the City’s maps and the criteria or standards of this section, the criteria and standards shall prevail. 2. Map Updates: The Department updates critical area maps based on critical area reports prepared for permit applications. 3. Flood Hazard Areas: a. Basic Map and Documentation Identifying Hazards: Flood hazard areas are identified by the Federal Insurance Administration in a scientific and engineering report entitled the Flood Insurance Study for the City of Renton, dated September 29, 1989, and any subsequent revision, with accompanying flood insurance maps which are hereby adopted by reference and declared to be a part of this section. The flood insurance study is on file at the Public Works Department. b. When Federal Insurance Study is Not Available: The Applicant shall obtain, for City review, and reasonably utilization any base flood elevation 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 125 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 30 and floodway data available from a Federal, State or other source, in the following instances: i. To administer RMC 4‐3‐050.G when base flood elevation data has not been provided in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.E. ii. To identify flood hazard areas that will be regulated; until a new Flood Insurance Rate Map is issued which incorporates the data utilized under RMC 4‐3‐050.D. 4. Steep Slope Delineation Procedure: The boundaries of a regulated steep sensitive or protected slope are determined to be in the location identified on the City of Renton’s COR Maps, the City’s online interactive mapping application available through the City’s website. An applicant’s qualified professional may substitute boundaries independently derived from survey data for the City’s consideration in determining the boundaries of sensitive or protected steep slopes. All topographic maps shall utilize two foot (2') contour intervals or the standard utilized in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas. 5. Streams and Lakes: Water class shall be determined in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.G.7.a. a. Reclassification: The reclassification of a water body to a lower class (i.e., F to Np, or Np to Ns, etc.) requires Administrator acceptance of a stream or lake study, followed by a legislative amendment to the map in RMC 4‐ 3‐050.E prior to its effect. The reclassification of a water body to a higher class (i.e., Ns to Np, Np to F, or F to S) requires either: Administrator acceptance of a 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 126 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 31 stream or lake study or consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, followed by a legislative amendment to the map in this section. b. Salmonid Migration Barriers: For the purposes of classifying or reclassifying water bodies, features determined by the Administrator to be salmonid migration barriers pursuant to the definition in RMC 4‐11‐190 shall be mapped. The Administrator shall prepare and update the map as appropriate. 6. Wetlands: Categorization of wetlands shall be determined in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.G.9, and also refer to the City of Renton Wetland and Stream Corridors Critical Areas Inventory. F. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AND FEES: 1. Preapplication Consultation: Any person intending to develop properties known or suspected to have critical areas present is strongly encouraged to meet with the appropriate City department representative during the earliest possible stages of project planning before major commitments have been made to a particular land use and/or project design. Effort put into a preapplication consultation and planning will help applicants create projects which will be more quickly and easily processed due to a better understanding on the part of applicants of regulatory requirements. 2. Plans and Studies Required: When an application is submitted for any building permit or land use review and/or to obtain approval of a use, development or construction, the location of the critical areas and buffers on the 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 127 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 32 site shall be indicated on the plans submitted based upon an inventory provided by a qualified specialist. a. Geologically Hazardous Areas: i. Whenever a proposed development requires a development permit and a geologic hazard is present on the site of the proposed development or on abutting or adjacent sites within fifty feet (50') of the subject site, geotechnical studies by licensed professionals, such as a geotechnical engineer and/or engineering geologist, shall be required. Specifically, geotechnical studies are required for developments proposed on sites with any of the following geologically hazardous areas: (a) Sensitive and protected slopes; (b) Medium, high, or very high landslide hazards; (c) High erosion hazards; (d) High seismic hazards; (e) Medium or high coal mine hazards. ii. The required studies shall demonstrate the following review criteria can be met: (a) The proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent or abutting properties beyond pre‐development conditions; and (b) The proposal will not adversely impact other critical areas; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 128 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 33 (c) The development can be safely accommodated on the site. iii. A mitigation plan may be required consistent with RMC 4‐3‐ 050.L. iv. Sensitive Slopes – Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards – High Erosion Hazards: Development applications shall submit erosion control plans consistent with Chapter 4‐8 RMC, Permits – General and Appeals. v. Coal Mine Hazards: (a) Medium Hazard – Report Required: Reports consistent with Chapter 4‐8 RMC, Permits – General and Appeals, shall be prepared for development proposed within medium coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within two hundred feet (200') of a medium coal mine hazard area. (b) High Hazard – Report Required: Reports consistent with Chapter 4‐8 RMC, Permits – General and Appeals, shall be prepared for development proposed within high coal mine hazard areas and for development proposed within five hundred feet (500') of a high coal mine hazard area. b. Habitat Conservation Areas: Based upon RMC 4‐3‐050.G.6, Habitat Conservation Areas, the City shall require a habitat/wildlife assessment for activities that are located within or abutting a critical habitat, defined in RMC 4‐11‐030, or that are adjacent to a critical habitat, and have the potential to significantly impact a critical habitat. The assessment shall determine the extent, 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 129 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 34 function and value of the critical habitat and potential for impacts and mitigation consistent with report requirements in RMC 4‐8‐120.D. c. Streams and Lakes: The applicant shall be required to conduct a stream or lake study pursuant to RMC 4‐8‐120 if a site contains a water body or buffer area and changes to buffer requirements or alterations of the water body or its associated buffer are proposed, either administratively or via a variance request. A stream or lake study is also required when the project area is within one hundred feet (100') of a water body even if the water body is not located on the subject property. d. Wellhead Protection Areas: The City may require an applicant to prepare a hydrogeologic study if the proposal has the potential to significantly impact groundwater quantity or quality, and sufficient information is not readily available. Such a report shall be prepared by a qualified professional at the applicant’s expense. Report content requirements may be specified by the City in accordance with State or Federal guidelines or tailored to the particular development application. Peer review of the applicant’s report may be required in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.F. e. Wetlands: i. Wetland Categorization: The applicant shall be required to conduct a study to determine the categorization of the wetland if the subject property or project area is within two hundred feet (200') of a wetland even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 130 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 35 alterations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in question or its buffer. If there is a potential Category I or II wetland within three hundred feet (300') of a proposal, the City may require an applicant to conduct a study even if the wetland is not located on the subject property but it is determined that alterations of the subject property are likely to impact the wetland in question or its buffer. ii. Wetland Delineation: A wetland delineation using the methods identified in the approved federal delineation manual and applicable regional supplement, as required by WAC 173‐22‐035, is required for any portion of a wetland on the subject property that will be impacted by the permitted activities. iii. Wetland Assessment: The applicant shall prepare a wetland assessment pursuant to RMC 4‐8‐120.D.2.3.a – j. f. Period of Validity: Studies submitted and reviewed are valid for five (5) years from date of study completion unless the Administrator determines that conditions have changed significantly. The Administrator may extend the period of validity, provided onsite conditions have not changed. 3. Testing Authorized: a. Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1, As Identified in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8: If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing non‐potable water pipeline, defined in RMC 4‐11‐160, in Zone 1 of a Wellhead Protection Area may degrade groundwater quality, the 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 131 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 36 Department may require leakage testing of the existing pipeline in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.G; and installation, sampling, and sample analysis of monitoring wells. Routine leakage testing of existing pipelines in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. Criteria for this determination is specified in RMC 4‐3‐050.D. Should pipeline leakage testing reveal any leakage at any level then the Department shall require immediate repairs to the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that no infiltration of water into the pipeline or exfiltration of substances conveyed in the pipeline shall occur. Any repairs which are made shall be tested for leakage pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.G. b. Pipeline Requirements – Zone 2, As Itentified in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8: If the Department has reason to believe that the operation or proposed operation of an existing pipeline in Zone 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area may degrade groundwater quality, the Department may require leakage testing in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.G; installation, sampling, and sample analysis of groundwater monitoring wells; repair of the pipeline to the satisfaction of the Department such that degradation of groundwater quality is minimized or eliminated. Criteria for this determination is specified under RMC 4‐3‐050.D. 4. Submittal Requirements: In order to be accepted for review, studies shall include all information as required in Chapter 4‐8 RMC. 5. Fees: See the currently adopted City of Renton Fee Schedule brochure available at the City’s website or in the City Clerk’s Office. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 132 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 37 6. Independent Secondary Review: The City may require independent review of an applicant’s report as follows: a. All Critical Areas: When appropriate due to the type of critical areas, habitat, or species present, project area conditions, project scope, or potential for negative impacts to critical areas, or lack of substantial documentation of impact avoidance in first study, the applicant may be required to prepare and/or fund analyses or activities, including, but not limited to: i. An evaluation by an independent qualified professional regarding the applicant’s analysis and the effectiveness of any proposed mitigating measures or programs, to include any recommendations as appropriate. This shall be paid at the applicant’s expense, and the Administrator shall select the third‐party review professional; and/or ii. A request for consultation with the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Washington State Department of Ecology, or the local Native American Tribe or other appropriate agency; and/or iii. Detailed surface and subsurface hydrologic features both on and abutting the site. b. Additional Requirements for Geologically Hazardous Areas: Independent secondary review shall be conducted in accordance with the following: i. Required – Sensitive and Protected Slopes, and Medium, High, or Very High Landslide Hazards: All geotechnical reports submitted in 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 133 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 38 accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.F, and Chapter 4‐8 RMC, Permits – General and Appeals, shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant’s expense. An applicant may request that independent review be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐ 050.D. ii. Required for Critical Facilities in High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: The City shall require independent review of a geotechnical report addressing a critical facility, defined in RMC 4‐11‐030, by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant’s expense. An applicant may request that independent review be waived by the Department Administrator in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050.D. iii. At City’s Discretion – High Erosion, High Seismic, Medium Coal Mine, or High Coal Mine Hazards: For any proposal except critical facilities, the City may require independent review of an applicant’s geotechnical report by qualified specialists selected by the City, at the applicant’s expense. 7. Waiver of Submittal Requirements: An applicant may request that the Administrator waive the report requirement pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.D, where it has been determined through field documentation that critical areas are not present or as specified below: a. Habitat Assessment: In cases where a proposal is not likely to significantly impact the critical habitat and there is sufficient information to 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 134 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 39 determine the effects of a proposal, an applicant may request that this report be waived by the Administrator. b. Streams and Lakes: i. Stream or Lake Study: This report may only be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that: (a) A road, building or other barrier exists between the water body and the proposed activity, or (b) The water body or required buffer area does not intrude on the applicant’s lot, and based on evidence submitted, the proposal will not result in significant adverse impacts to nearby water bodies regulated under this section; or (c) Applicable data and analysis appropriate to the proposed project exists and an additional study is not necessary. ii. Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan: This plan may only be waived when no impacts have been identified through a stream or lake study. c. Wetland Assessment The wetland assessment shall be waived by the Administrator when the applicant provides satisfactory evidence that a road, building or other barrier exists between the wetland and the proposed activity, when the buffer area, determined with a wetland categorization, needed or required will not intrude on the applicant’s lot, or when applicable data and analysis appropriate to the project proposed exists and an additional report is not necessary. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 135 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 40 G. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: 1. General: No proposal shall result in a loss of critical area functions or values. If the application of these provisions would deny all reasonable use of the property, the applicant may apply for a variance as identified in RMC 4‐9‐ 250. 2. Critical Area Buffers and Structure Setbacks from Buffers: The following critical area buffers and structure setbacks from buffers are established for each critical area. Critical Area Category or Type Critical Area Buffer Width Structure Setback beyond Buffer1 Flood Hazard Areas Flood Hazard Areas None None Geologically Hazardous Areas Steep Slopes:2 Sensitive Slopes None3 None3, 4 Protected Slopes5 None3 15 ft.1 Landslide Hazards:2 Low None3 None3, 4 Medium None3 None3, 4 High None3 None3, 4 Very High5 50 ft.15 ft.1 Erosion Hazards: Low None None High None None Seismic Hazards: Low None None High None None Coal Mine Hazards: Low None3 None3 Medium None3 None3 High None3 None3 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 136 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 41 Habitat Conservation Areas Critical Habitats Established by Administrator per RMC 4‐3‐050.G 15 ft.1 Streams and Lakes5 Type F 115 ft. 15 ft.1 Type Np 75 ft. 15 ft.1 Type Ns 50 ft. 15 ft.1 Wellhead Protection Areas Zones 1 and 2 None None Wetlands6 Low Impact Land Uses:7 High Habitat Function (8‐9 points) Moderate Habitat Function (5‐7 points) Low Habitat Function (3‐4 points) All Other Scores 15 ft.1 Category I – Bogs & Natural Heritage Wetlands 175 ft. Category I – All Others 175 ft. 125 ft. 75 ft. 75 ft Category II 150 ft. 100 ft. 75 ft. n/a Category III 100 ft. 75 ft. 50 ft. n/a Category IV 40 ft. n/a All Other Land Uses: High Habitat Function (8‐9 points) Moderate Habitat Function (5‐7 points) Low Habitat Function (3‐4 points) All Other Scores 15 ft.1 Category I – Bogs & Natural Heritage Wetlands 200 ft. Category I – All Others 200 ft. 150 ft. 115 ft. 115 ft 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 137 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 42 Category II 175 ft. 150 ft. 100 ft. n/a Category III 125 ft. 100 ft. 75 ft. n/a Category IV 50 ft. n/a Footnotes: 1. The following may be allowed in the building setback area: a. Landscaping; b. Uncovered decks, less than eighteen inches (18”) above grade; c. Building overhangs, if such overhangs do not extend more than twenty‐four inches (24”) into the setback area; and d. Impervious ground surfaces, such as driveways and patios, provided that such improvements may be subject to water quality regulations and maximum impervious surface limitations. 2. Buffers shall be established from the top, toe, and sides of slopes. 3. Based upon the results of a geotechnical report and/or independent review, conditions of approval for developments may include buffers and/or setbacks from buffers. 4. Unless required pursuant to the adopted building code or Building Official. 5. When a required stream/lake buffer falls within a protected slope or very high landslide hazard area, the stream/lake buffer width shall extend to the boundary of the protected slope of very high landslide hazard area. 6. Areas that are functionally and effectively disconnected from the wetland by a permanent road or other substantially developed surface of sufficient width and with use characteristics such that buffer functions are not provided shall not be counted toward the minimum buffer unless these areas can be feasibly removed, relocated or restored to provide buffer functions. 7. Low intensity land uses include but are not limited to the following: unpaved trails, low intensity open space (hiking, bird‐watching, preservation of natural resources, etc.) and utility corridor without a maintenance road and little or no vegetation management. 3. Native Growth Protection Areas: a. Required: A native growth protection area shall be instituted to protect a critical area from any proposed development for a non‐exempt activity as follows: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 138 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 43 i. Protected slopes and their associated buffers. ii. Very high landslide hazard areas and their associated buffers. iii. Class F, Np, and Ns, as defined in subsection F.7 of these regulations, streams or lakes and their associated buffers. iv. Category I, II, III, or IV wetlands, as defined in subsection 9.c of these regulations, and their associated buffers. b. May be Required: Native growth protection areas may be required for high landslide hazard area buffers, or for critical habitats and their buffers. c. Application as Condition of Approval When Otherwise Not Required: A proposal may be conditioned to provide for native growth protection areas. d. Standards: i. Trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained in designated native growth protection areas. ii. Any activities in native growth protection areas shall be consistent with applicable critical area regulations. iii. The City may require enhancement of native growth protection areas to improve functions and values, reduce erosion or landslide potential, or to meet another identified purpose of these critical area regulations. e. Method of Creation: Native growth protection areas shall be established by one of the following methods, in order of preference: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 139 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 44 i. Tract and Deed Restriction: The applicant shall create a tract via the subdivision and record a permanent and irrevocable covenant running with the land or deed restriction on the property title of any critical area management tract or tracts created as a condition of a permit. Such covenant or deed restriction(s) shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. A covenant running with the land shall be placed on the tract restricting its separate sale. Each abutting lot owner or the homeowners’ association shall have an undivided interest in the tract. ii. Conservation Easement: The applicant shall, subject to the City’s approval, convey to the City or other public or nonprofit entity specified by the City, a recorded easement for the protection of the critical area and/or its buffer. iii. Protective Easement: The applicant shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title of a parcel or tract of land containing a critical area and/or its buffer created as a condition of a permit. Such protective easement shall be held by the current and future property owner, shall run with the land, and shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the easement except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 140 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 45 written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. f. Marking Prior to and During Construction: The location of the outer extent of the critical area buffer and areas not to be disturbed pursuant to an approved plan shall be marked with high visibility orange construction fencing and silt fencing in the field to prevent disturbance by individuals and equipment during the development or construction of the approved activity. g. Permanent Fencing Required: Permanent fencing of the native growth protection area containing critical area and buffers is required, except when studies document to the satisfaction of the reviewing official that such fencing will adversely impact habitat connectivity. h. Signage Required: The common boundary between a native growth protection area and the abutting land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood or metal signs on treated or metal posts. Sign locations and size specifications shall be approved by the City. Suggested wording is as follows: “Protection of this natural area is in your care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited by law.” i. Responsibility for Maintenance: Responsibility for maintaining the native growth protection easements or tracts shall be held by a homeowners’ association, abutting lot owners, the permit applicant or designee, or other appropriate entity, as approved by the City. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 141 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 46 j. Maintenance Covenant and Note Required: The following note shall appear on the face of all plats, short plats, PUDs, or other approved site plans containing separate native growth protection easements or tracts, and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: “MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action, abutting or including a native growth protection easement [tract] are responsible for maintenance and protection of the easement [tract]. Maintenance includes ensuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received.” 4. Flood Hazard Areas: a. Classification: Flood hazard areas are defined as the land in the floodplain subject to one percent (1%) or greater chance of flooding in any given year. Designation on flood maps always include the letters A or V. b. Data to be Used for Existing and Future Flow Conditions: The City shall determine the components of the flood hazard areas after obtaining, reviewing and utilizing base flood elevations and available floodplain data for a flood having a one percent (1%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year, often referred to as the “one‐hundred‐year flood.” The City may require projections of future flow conditions for proposals in unmapped potential flood hazard areas. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 142 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 47 c. General Standards: In all flood hazard areas, the following standards are required: i. Anchoring – All New Construction: All new construction and substantial improvements shall be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse, or lateral movement of the structure. ii. Anchoring – Manufactured Homes: All manufactured homes must likewise be anchored to prevent flotation, collapse or lateral movement, and shall be installed using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. Anchoring methods may include, but are not limited to, use of over‐the‐top or frame ties to ground anchors (reference FEMA’s Manufactured Home Installation in Frequently Flooded Areas guidebook for additional techniques). iii. Construction Materials and Methods: (a) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage. (b) All new construction and substantial improvements shall be constructed using methods, statutes, codes, rules, regulations and practices that minimize flood damage. (c) Electrical, heating, ventilation, plumbing, and air‐ conditioning equipment and other service facilities shall be designed and/or otherwise elevated or located so as to prevent water from entering or accumulating within the components during conditions of flooding. iv. Utilities: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 143 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 48 (a) All new and replacement water supply systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the system. A proposed water well shall be located on high ground that is not in the floodway (WAC 173‐160‐171). (b) New and replacement sanitary sewage systems shall be designed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters into the systems and discharge from the systems into flood waters. (c) On‐site waste disposal systems shall be located to avoid impairment to them or contamination from them during flooding. v. Subdivision Proposals: (a) All subdivision proposals shall be consistent with the need to minimize flood damage; (b) All subdivision proposals shall have public utilities and facilities such as sewer, gas, electrical, and water systems located and constructed to minimize flood damage; (c) All subdivision proposals shall have adequate drainage provided to reduce exposure to flood damage; and (d) All subdivision proposals shall show the flood hazard areas information and boundary on the subdivision drawing including the nature, location, dimensions, and elevations of the subdivided area. vi. Project Review: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 144 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 49 (a) Where elevation data is not available either through the flood insurance study or from another authoritative source, i.e., RMC 4‐3‐050.D, applications for building permits shall be reviewed to assure that proposed construction will be reasonably safe from flooding. The test of reasonableness includes use of historical data, high water marks, photographs of past flooding, etc., where available. Failure to elevate at least two feet (2') above grade in these zones may result in higher insurance rates. (b) Where base flood elevation data has not been provided or is not available from another authoritative source, it shall be generated by the applicant. d. Specific Standards: In all flood hazard areas, the following provisions are required: i. Residential Construction: (a) New construction and substantial improvement of any residential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated a minimum of one foot (1') above base flood elevation. (b) Fully enclosed areas below the lowest floor that are subject to flooding are prohibited, or shall be designed to automatically equalize hydrostatic flood forces on exterior walls by allowing for the entry and exit of flood waters. Designs for meeting this requirement must either be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect or must meet or exceed the following minimum criteria: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 145 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 50 (1) A minimum of two (2) openings having a total net area of not less than one (1) square inch for every square foot of enclosed area subject to flooding shall be provided; and (2) The bottom of all openings shall be no higher than one foot (1’) above grade; and (3) Openings may be equipped with screens, louvers, or other coverings or devices; provided, that they permit the automatic entry and exit of flood waters. ii. Manufactured Homes: (a) All manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved within Zones A1‐A30, AH, and AE on the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map , shall be elevated on a permanent foundation such that the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of one foot (1’) above the base flood elevation and be secured to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse and lateral movement. (b) Manufactured homes to be placed or substantially improved on sites in an existing manufactured home park or subdivision within Zones A1‐30, AH, and AE on the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map that are not subject to the above manufactured home provisions shall be elevated so that either the lowest floor of the manufactured home is elevated a minimum of one foot (1') above the base flood elevation or the manufactured home chassis is supported by reinforced piers or other foundation elements of at least 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 146 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 51 equivalent strength that are no less than thirty‐six inches (36") in height above grade and be secured to an adequately anchored foundation system to resist flotation, collapse, and lateral movement. iii. Nonresidential Construction: New construction or substantial improvement of any commercial, industrial or other nonresidential structure shall have the lowest floor, including basement, elevated a minimum of one foot (1') above the level of the base flood elevation. he lowest or, together with attendant utility and sanitary facilities, shall: (a) Be floodproofed so that below the minimum elevation required in RMC 4‐3‐050.G the structure is watertight with walls substantially impermeable to the passage of water; (b) Have structural components capable of resisting hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads and effects of buoyancy; (c) Be certified by a registered professional engineer or architect so that the design and methods of construction are in accordance with accepted standards of practice for meeting provisions of this subsection based on their development and/or review of the structural design, specifications and plans. Such certifications shall be provided to the Administrator; (d) Nonresidential structures that are elevated, but not floodproofed, must meet the same standards for space below the lowest floor as described in RMC 4‐3‐050.G; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 147 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 52 iv. Recreational Vehicles: Recreational vehicles placed on sites within Zones A1‐30, AH, and AE on the community’s Flood Insurance Rate Map not including recreational vehicle storage lots shall either: (a) Be on the site for fewer than one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days; (b) Be fully licensed and ready for highway use, on its wheels or jacking system, attached to the site only by quick disconnect type utilities and security devices, and have no permanently attached additions; or (c) Meet the requirements of RMC 4‐3‐050.G and the elevation and anchoring requirements for manufactured homes. e. Additional Restrictions within Floodways: Floodways, defined in RMC 4‐11‐060, are located within flood hazard areas established in RMC 4‐3‐ 050.D, Since the floodway is an extremely hazardous area due to the velocity of flood waters which carry debris, potential projectiles, and erosion potential, the following provisions apply: i. Increase in Flood Levels Prohibited: Encroachments, including fill, new construction, substantial improvements, and other development are prohibited unless certification by a registered professional engineer demonstrates through hydrologic and hydraulic analyses performed in accordance with standard engineering practice that: (a) Encroachments shall not result in any increase in flood levels during the occurrence of the base flood discharge; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 148 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 53 (b) There are no adverse impacts to the subject property or abutting or adjacent properties; and (c) There are no higher flood elevations upstream; and (d) The impact due to floodway encroachment shall be analyzed using future land use condition flows. ii. Residential Construction in Floodways: Construction or reconstruction of residential structures is prohibited within designated floodways, except for: (a) Repairs, reconstruction, or improvements to a structure which do not increase the ground floor area; and (b) Repairs, reconstruction or improvements to a structure, the cost of which does not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: (1) before the repair, reconstruction, or improvement is started; or (2) if the structure has been damaged, and is being restored, before the damage occurred. Work done on structures to comply with existing health, sanitary, or safety codes or to structures identified as historic places may be excluded in the fifty percent (50%). iii. Compliance Requirements: If RMC 4‐3‐050.G is satisfied, all new construction and substantial improvements shall comply with all applicable flood hazard areas reduction provisions of this section. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 149 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 54 iv. Bridges Crossing Floodways: In mapped or unmapped flood hazard areas, future flow conditions shall be considered for proposed bridge proposals crossing floodways. f. Critical Facility: Construction of new critical facilities, as defined in RMC 4‐11‐030, shall be, to the extent possible, located outside the limits of flood hazard areas (one hundred (100) year) floodplain. Construction of new critical facilities shall be permissible within flood hazard areas if no feasible alternative site is available. Critical facilities constructed within flood hazard areas shall have the lowest floor elevated three feet (3') or more above the level of the base flood elevation (one hundred (100) year) at the site. Floodproofing and sealing measures must be taken to ensure that toxic substances will not be displaced by or released into flood waters. Access routes elevated to or above the level of the base flood elevation shall be provided to all critical facilities to the extent possible. g. Compensatory Storage: i. Compensatory Storage Required: Development proposals and other alterations shall not reduce the effective base flood storage volume of the floodplain. If grading or other activity will reduce the effective storage volume, compensatory storage shall be created on the site or off the site if legal arrangements can be made to assure that the effective compensatory storage volume will be preserved over time. Compensatory storage shall be configured so as not to trap or strand salmonids after flood waters recede and may be 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 150 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 55 configured to provide salmonid habitat or high flow refuge whenever suitable site conditions exist and the configuration does not adversely affect bank stability or existing habitat. Effective base flood storage volume shall be based on the elevations shown in the flood hazard areas map, identified in RMC 4‐3‐ 05.E.3 or as determined through a study where no base flood evaluation information exists. ii. Determining Finished Floor Elevations According to FEMA: The FEMA one hundred (100) year flood plain elevations shall be used to establish building finished floor elevations to comply with other National Flood Insurance Program requirements. 5. Geologically Hazardous Areas Defined: a. Steep Slope Types: i. Sensitive slopes: A hillside, or portion thereof, characterized by: (a) an average slope of twenty‐five percent (25%) to less than forty percent (40%) as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City; or (b) an average slope of forty percent (40%) or greater with a vertical rise of less than fifteen feet (15') as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City; (c) abutting an average slope of twenty‐five percent (25%) to forty percent (40%) as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City. This definition excludes engineered retaining walls. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 151 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 56 ii. Protected slopes: A hillside, or portion thereof, characterized by an average slope of forty percent (40%) or greater grade and having a minimum vertical rise of fifteen feet (15') as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City. b. Landslide Hazards: i. Low Landslide Hazard (LL): Areas with slopes less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. Medium Landslide Hazard (LM): Areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils that consist largely of sand, gravel or glacial till. iii. High Landslide Hazards (LH): Areas with slopes greater than forty percent (40%), and areas with slopes between fifteen percent (15%) and forty percent (40%) and underlain by soils consisting largely of silt and clay. iv. Very High Landslide Hazards (LV): Areas of known mapped or identified landslide deposits. c. Erosion Hazards: i. Low Erosion Hazard (EL): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) as having slight or moderate erosion potential, and a slope less than fifteen percent (15%). ii. High Erosion Hazard (EH): Areas with soils characterized by the Natural Resource Conservation Service (formerly U.S. Soil Conservation Service) 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 152 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 57 as having severe or very severe erosion potential, and a slope more than fifteen percent (15%). d. Seismic Hazards: i. Low Seismic Hazard (SL): Areas underlain by dense soils or bedrock. These soils generally have site classifications of A through D, as defined in the International Building Code, 2012. ii. High Seismic Hazard (SH): Areas underlain by soft or loose, saturated soils. These soils generally have site classifications E or F, as defined in the International Building Code, 2012. e. Coal Mine Hazards: i. Low Coal Mine Hazards (CL): Areas with no known mine workings and no predicted subsidence. While no mines are known in these areas, undocumented mining is known to have occurred. ii. Medium Coal Mine Hazards (CM): Areas where mine workings are deeper than two hundred feet (200') for steeply dipping seams, or deeper than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by subsidence. iii. High Coal Mine Hazard (CH): Areas with abandoned and improperly sealed mine openings and areas underlain by mine workings shallower than two hundred feet (200') in depth for steeply dipping seams, or shallower than fifteen (15) times the thickness of the seam or workings for 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 153 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 58 gently dipping seams. These areas may be affected by collapse or other subsidence. f. Protected Slopes, as defined in subsection a.ii, above: Development is prohibited on protected slopes. Exceptions to this prohibition may be granted pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.J. g. Sensitive Slopes – Medium, High and Very High Landslide Hazards – High Erosion Hazards: During construction, weekly on‐site inspections shall be required at the applicant’s expense. Weekly reports documenting erosion control measures shall be required. h. Very High Landslide Hazards: i. Prohibited Development: Development shall not be permitted on land designated with very high landslide hazards. Exceptions to this prohibition may be granted pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.J. ii. Buffer Modification: The Administrator may increase or decrease the required buffer based upon the results of a geotechnical report, and any increase or decrease based upon the results of the geotechnical report shall be documented in writing and included with the project approval. The modified standard shall be based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4‐9‐250 shall be followed. i. Coal Mine Hazards: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 154 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 59 i. Mitigation – Additional Engineering Design and Remediation Specifications: After approval of the mitigation approach proposed as a result of RMC 4‐3‐050.D, and prior to construction, the applicant shall complete engineering design drawings and specifications for remediation. Upon approval of the plans and specifications, the applicant shall complete the remediation. Hazard mitigation shall be performed by or under the direction of a licensed geotechnical engineer or engineering geologist. The applicant shall document the hazard mitigation by submitting as‐builts and a remediation construction report. ii. Hazards Found during Construction: Any hazards found during any development activities shall be immediately reported to the Development Services Division. Any coal mine hazards shall be mitigated prior to recommencing construction based upon supplemental recommendations or reports by the applicant’s geotechnical professional. iii. Construction in Areas with Combustion: Construction shall not be permitted where surface or subsurface investigations indicate the possible presence of combustion in the underlying seam or seams, unless the impact is adequately mitigated in accordance with the recommendations of the applicant’s geotechnical professional. 6. Habitat Conservation Areas: a. Classification of Critical Habitats: Habitats that have a primary association with the documented presence of non‐salmonid or salmonid species 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 155 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 60 (see RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1 and RMC 4‐3‐090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, for salmonid species) species proposed or listed by the Federal government or State of Washington as endangered, threatened, sensitive and/or of local importance. b. Mapping: Critical habitats are identified by lists, categories and definitions of species promulgated by the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife (Non‐game Data System Special Animal Species) as identified in WAC 232‐12‐011; in the Priority Habitat and Species Program of the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife; or by rules and regulations adopted currently or hereafter by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. c. Buffers: The Administrator shall require the establishment of buffer areas for activities in, or adjacent to, habitat conservation areas when needed to protect fish and wildlife habitats of importance. Buffers shall consist of an undisturbed area of native vegetation, or areas identified for restoration, established to protect the integrity, functions and values of the affected habitat. Buffer widths shall be based on: i. Type and intensity of human activity proposed to be conducted on the site and adjacent sites. ii. Recommendations contained within a habitat assessment report. iii. Management recommendations issued by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 156 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 61 d Alterations Require Mitigation: The Administrator may approve mitigation to compensate for adverse impacts of a development proposal to habitat conservation areas through use of a federally and/or state certified mitigation bank or in‐lieu fee program. See RMC 4‐3‐050.L. 7. Streams and Lakes: a. Classification System: The following classification system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating Streams and Lakes in the City. This classification system is based on the State’s Permanent Water Typing System WAC 222‐16‐030. Stream and lake buffer widths are based on the following rating system: i. Type S: Waters inventoried as “Shorelines of the State” under chapter RCW 90.58. These waters are regulated under Renton’s Shoreline Master Program RMC Chapter 4‐3‐090. ii. Type F: Waters that are known to be used by fish or meet the physical criteria to be potentially used by fish and that have perennial (year‐ round) or seasonal flows. iii. Type Np: Waters that do not contain fish or fish habitat and that have perennial (year‐round) flows. Perennial stream waters do not go dry any time of a year of normal rainfall. However, for the purpose of water typing, Type Np waters include the intermittent dry portions of the perennial channel below the uppermost point of perennial flow. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 157 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 62 iv. Type Ns: Waters that do not contain fish or fish habitat and have intermittent flows. These are seasonal, non‐fish habitat streams in which surface flow is not present for at least some portion of a year of normal rainfall and are not located downstream from any stream reach that is a Type Np Water. Ns Waters must be physically connected by an above‐ground channel system to Type S, F, or Np Waters. b. Non‐regulated: Waters that are considered “intentionally created” not regulated under this section include irrigation ditches, grass‐lined swales and canals that do not meet the criteria for Type S, F, Np, or Ns Non‐regulated waters may also include streams created as mitigation. Purposeful creation must be demonstrated through documentation, photographs, statements and/or other persuasive evidence. c. Measurement: i. Stream/Lake Boundary: The boundary of a stream or lake shall be considered to be its ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The OHWM shall be flagged in the field by a qualified consultant when any study is required pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.G.7. ii. Buffer: The boundary of a buffer shall extend beyond the boundaries of the stream or lake to the width applicable to the stream/lake class as noted in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.2, Critical Area Buffers and Structure Setbacks from Buffers. Where streams enter or exit pipes, the buffer in this subsection shall be 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 158 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 63 measured perpendicular to the OHWM from the end of the pipe along the open channel section of the stream. Figure 4‐3‐050.G.7.c.ii. Buffer measurement at pipe opening. d. Stream/Lake Buffer Width Requirements: i. Buffers and Setbacks: (a) Minimum Stream/Lake Buffer Widths: See RMC 4‐3‐ 050.G.2. (b) Piped or Culverted Streams: (1) Building structures over a natural stream located in an underground pipe or culvert except as may be granted by a variance in RMC 4‐9‐ 250 are prohibited. Transportation or utility crossings or other alterations pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.J. are allowed. Pavement over a pre‐existing piped stream is allowed. Relocation of the piped stream system around structures is allowed. If structure locations are proposed to be changed or the piped stream is being relocated around buildings, a hydrologic and hydraulic analysis of existing piped stream systems will be required for any development project site that 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 159 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 64 contains a piped stream to ensure it is sized to convey the one hundred (100) year runoff level from the total upstream tributary area based on future land use conditions. (2) No buffers are required along segments of piped or culverted streams. The City shall require easements and setbacks from pipes or culverts consistent with stormwater requirements in RMC 4‐6‐030 and the adopted drainage manual. ii. Increased Buffer Width: (a) Areas of High Blow‐down Potential: Where the stream/lake buffer is in an area of high blow‐down potential for trees as identified by a qualified professional, the buffer width may be expanded an additional fifty feet (50') on the windward side. (b) Habitat Corridors: Where the stream/lake buffer is adjacent to high functioning critical areas (e.g., wetlands, other streams, other identified habitats), the stream/lake buffer width shall be extend to the buffer boundary of the other protected critical area to establish a habitat corridor as needed to protect or establish contiguous vegetated areas between streams/lakes and other critical areas. e. Criteria for Permit Approval – Type F, Np, and Ns: Permit approval for projects on or near regulated Type F, Np and Ns water bodies shall be granted only if the approval is consistent with the provisions of this subsection, and complies with one of the following conditions: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 160 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 65 i. A proposed action meets the standard provisions of this section and results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located; or ii. A proposed action meets alternative administrative standards pursuant to this section and the proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located; or iii. A variance process is successfully completed and the proposed activity results in no net loss of regulated riparian area or shoreline ecological function in the drainage basin where the site is located. f. Incentives for Restoration of Streams Located in an Underground Pipe or Culvert: Daylighting of culverted watercourses should be encouraged and allowed with the following modified standards: i. Residential Zones: Reduced setbacks, lot width and lot depth standards of Chapter 4‐2 RMC may be approved without requirement of a variance for lots that abut the daylighted watercourse to accommodate the same number of lots as if the watercourse were not daylighted. ii. Mixed Use, Commercial, and Industrial Zones: Where greater lot coverage allowances are provided for structured parking in Chapter 4‐2 RMC, lot coverage may be increased to the limit allowed for structured parking if instead a stream is daylighted. The increase in impervious surface allowed shall be equal to the area of stream restoration. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 161 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 66 (a) Standard buffers may be reduced pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐ 050.I. If reduced buffers in RMC 4‐3‐050.I along with other development standards of the zone would not allow the same development level as without the watercourse daylighting, a modification may be requested as in RMC 4‐3‐ 050.I.2.c. (b) When designed consistent with the City’s flood regulations in RMC 4‐3‐050.G, portions of the daylighted stream/created buffer may be considered part of compensatory storage in flood hazard areas. (c) Stream relocation is permitted subject to RMC 4‐3‐ 050.J. 8. Wellhead Protection Areas: a. Applicability: Developments, facilities, uses and activities discussed in this subsection shall comply with the applicable provisions and restrictions of this section and RMC 4‐4, 4‐5, 4‐6, 4‐9, and 5‐5 for the Wellhead Protection Areas, as classified below, in which the developments, facilities, uses and activities are located, except as preempted by Federal or State law. i. Wellhead Protection Areas: Wellhead Protection Areas are the portion of an aquifer within the zone of capture and recharge area for a well or well field owned or operated by the City. ii. Wellhead Protection Area Zones: Zones of a Wellhead Protection Area are designated to provide graduated levels of Wellhead Protection Area recharge. Zone boundaries are determined using best available 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 162 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 67 science documented in the City of Renton Wellhead Protection Plan, an appendix of the City of Renton Water System Plan, as periodically updated. The following zones may be designated: (a) Zone 1: The land area situated between a well or well field owned by the City and the three hundred sixty‐five (365) day groundwater travel time contour. (b) Zone 1 Modified: The same land area described for Zone 1 but for the purpose of protecting a high‐priority well, wellfield, or spring withdrawing from a confined aquifer with partial leakage in the overlying or underlying confining layers.. Uses, activities, and facilities located in this area are regulated as if located within Zone 1 except as provided by RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8. (c) Zone 2: The land area situated between the three hundred sixty‐five (365) day groundwater travel time contour and the boundary of the zone of potential capture for a well or well field owned or operated by the City. If the aquifer supplying water to such a well, well field, or spring is naturally protected by confining overlying and underlying geologic layers, the City may choose not to subdivide a Wellhead Protection Area into two (2) zones. In such a case, the entire Wellhead Protection Area will be designated as Zone 2. iii. Mapping: (a) Determination of Location within a Zone of a Wellhead Protection Area: In determining the location of facilities within the zones, the following rules shall apply: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 163 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 68 (1) Facilities located wholly within a Wellhead Protection zone shall be governed by the restrictions applicable to that zone. (2) Facilities having parts lying within more than one zone of a Wellhead Protection Area shall be governed as follows: Each part of the facility shall be reviewed and regulated by the requirements set forth in this section for the zone in which that part of the facility is actually located. (3) Facilities having parts lying both in and out of a Wellhead Protection Area shall be governed as follows: (a) That portion which is within a Wellhead Protection Area shall be governed by the applicable restrictions in this section; and (b) That portion which is not in a Wellhead Protection Area shall not be governed by this section. b. Facilities: i. Hazardous Materials – Use, Production, Storage, Treatment, Disposal, or Management: Persons that store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous material as defined by RMC 4‐11‐080, Definitions H, which are new, existing, or to be closed, shall be subject to the requirements of this section, and as further specified below: (a) All applications for development permits for uses in which hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or produced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 164 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 69 produced at a location in the Wellhead Protection Area must be reviewed for compliance with this chapter by the Department prior to approval. (b) The focus of review for all permits will be on the hazardous materials that will be stored, handled, treated, used, or produced; and the potential for these substances to degrade groundwater quality. (c) An inventory of hazardous materials on forms provided by the Department shall be submitted to the Department upon application for a development permit. (d) Where required by the Department, plans and specifications for secondary containment shall be submitted and shall comply with RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8. Development permits shall not be issued until plans and specifications for secondary containment, if required, have been approved by the Department. ii. New Facilities– Zones 1 and 2: All proposals for new facilities within any zone of an Wellhead Protection Area must be reviewed for compliance with this section prior to issuance of any development permits for uses in which hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or produced or which increase the quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced. iii. Prohibited Facilities – Zone 1: (a) The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of hazardous materials in aggregate quantities greater that five hundred (500) 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 165 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 70 gallons shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of a Wellhead Protection Area. The storage, handling, use, treatment or production of tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry‐ cleaning fluid) shall not be allowed within Zone 1 of a Wellhead Protection Area. (b) No person, persons, corporation or other legal entity shall temporarily or permanently abandon, close, sell, or otherwise transfer a facility in a Wellhead Protection Area without complying with the requirements of RMC 4‐9‐015.F, Closure Permit, and permit conditions of this section. iv. Existing Facilities Change in Quantities – Zone 1: In Zone 1 of a Wellhead Protection Area, no change in operations at a facility shall be allowed that increases the aggregate quantity of hazardous materials stored, handled, treated, used, or produced with the following exception: An increase in the quantity of hazardous materials is allowed up to the amount allowed for a new facility in Zone 1 as provided by RMC 4‐3‐050.C. v. Existing Facilities – Allowances in Zone 2: The storage, handling, treatment, use or production of hazardous materials at existing facilities shall be allowed within Zone 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area upon compliance with the permit requirements, release reporting requirements, and closure requirements of this section. vi. Requirements for Facilities – Zones 1 and 2: The following conditions in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.b.vi.(a) to (d) will be required as part of any operating permit issued for facilities in Zone 1 of a Wellhead Protection Area. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 166 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 71 Conditions in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.b.vi.(a) to (c) shall apply to facilities in Zone 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area. (a) Secondary Containment – Zones 1 and 2: (1) Materials Stored in Tanks subject to DOE – Zones 1 and 2: Hazardous materials stored in tanks that are subject to regulation by the Washington Department of Ecology under chapter 173‐360 WAC are exempt from containment requirements in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.b.vi.(a)(2), Secondary Containment – Zones 1 and 2, but are subject to applicable requirements in RMC 4‐5‐120, Underground Storage Tank Secondary Containment Regulations. (2) Secondary Containment Devices Required in Zones 1 and 2: Every owner of a facility shall provide secondary containment devices adequate in size to contain on‐site any unauthorized release of hazardous materials from any area where these substances are either stored, handled, treated, used, or produced. Secondary containment devices shall prevent hazardous materials from contacting soil, surface water, and groundwater and shall prevent hazardous materials from entering storm drains and, except for authorized and permitted discharges, the sanitary sewer. (A) Design requirements for secondary containment devices are as follows: (i) The secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the primary container in cases where a single container is used to store, handle, treat, use, or produce a hazardous 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 167 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 72 material. In cases where multiple containers are used, the secondary containment device shall be large enough to contain the volume of the largest container. Volumes specified are in addition to the design flow rate of the automatic fire extinguishing system, if present, to which the secondary containment device is subjected. The secondary containment device shall be capable of containing the fire flow for a period of twenty (20) minutes or more. (ii) All secondary containment devices shall be constructed of materials of sufficient thickness, density, and composition to prevent structural weakening of the containment device as a result of contact with any hazardous material. If coatings are used to provide chemical resistance for secondary containment devices, they shall also be resistant to expected abrasion and impact conditions. Secondary containment devices shall be capable of containing any unauthorized release for at least the maximum anticipated period sufficient to allow detection and removal of the release. (iii) Hazardous materials stored outdoors and their attendant secondary containment devices shall be covered to preclude precipitation with the exception of hazardous materials stored in tanks that have been approved by and are under permit from the City of Renton Fire Prevention Bureau. Secondary containment for such tanks, if uncovered, shall be able to accommodate the volume of precipitation that could enter the containment device during a twenty‐four (24) hour, twenty‐five (25) year storm, in addition to the volume of the hazardous material stored in the tank. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 168 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 73 (iv) Secondary containment devices shall include monitoring procedures or technology capable of detecting the presence of a hazardous material within twenty‐four (24) hours following a release. (v) Hazardous materials shall be removed from the secondary containment device within twenty‐four (24) hours of detection and shall be legally stored or disposed. (vi) Areas in which there are floor drains, catchbasins, or other conveyance piping that does not discharge into a secondary containment device that meets the requirements of this chapter shall not be used for secondary containment of hazardous materials. Closure of existing piping shall be according to procedures and designs approved by the Department. (vii) Primary containers shall be impervious to the contents stored therein, properly labeled, and fitted with a tight cover which is kept closed except when substances are being withdrawn or used. (viii) Hazardous materials stored outdoors when the facility is left unsupervised must be inaccessible to the public. Such techniques as locked storage sheds, locked fencing, or other techniques may be used if they will effectively preclude access. (ix) Stored hazardous materials shall be protected and secured, as needed, against impact and earthquake to prevent damage to 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 169 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 74 the primary container that would result in release of hazardous materials that would escape the secondary containment area. (b) Monitoring Required: See RMC 4‐9‐015. (c) Emergency Collection Devices – Zones 1 and 2: Vacuum suction devices, absorbent scavenger materials, or other devices approved by the Department shall be present on site (or available within an hour by contract with a cleanup company approved by the Department), in sufficient quantity to control and collect the total quantity of hazardous materials plus absorbent material. The presence of such emergency collection devices and/or cleanup contract are the responsibility and at the expense of the owner and shall be documented in the operating permit. (d) Additional Facility Requirements for Zone 1: (1) An owner of a facility may, at their own expense, be required to institute a program to monitor groundwater, surface water runoff, and/or site soils. The Department may require that the owner of a facility install one or more groundwater monitoring wells in a manner approved by the Department in order to accommodate the required groundwater monitoring. Criteria used to determine the need for site monitoring shall include, but not be limited to, the proximity of the facility to the City’s production or monitoring wells, the type and quantity of hazardous materials on site, and whether or not the hazardous materials are stored in underground vessels. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 170 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 75 (2) An owner may be required to pave all currently unpaved areas of their facility that are subject to any vehicular use or storage, use, handling, or production of hazardous materials. (3) An owner may be required to meet the provisions of RMC 4‐6‐030.E.4 if the nature of the business involves the use of hazardous materials outside of fully enclosed structures, and the City evaluates the existing stormwater collection and conveyance system. (4) The owner may be required to test interior wastewater plumbing and the building side sewer for tightness according to RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.g.i.(c), Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1, and the City reserves the right to require that such wastewater conveyance be repaired or replaced according to RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8.g.i, Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1. (5) An owner shall be paid by the City, fifty percent (50%) of documented capital costs up to twenty‐five thousand dollars ($25,000.00) for required installation and construction of monitoring wells, site paving, wastewater conveyance, and stormwater improvements as required in RMC 4‐3‐ 050. G.8.b.vi.(f)(1) and (2), Groundwater Monitoring and Paving. Payment by the City shall be made according to adopted administrative rules. c. Limited Exemptions: Activities that are exempt from some, but not all provisions of this section are listed below. Whether the exempted activities are also exempt from permits will be determined based upon application of 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 171 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 76 Chapters 4‐8 and 4‐9 RMC, or other applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. i. Hazardous Materials (a) Materials for Sale in Original Small Containers: Hazardous materials offered for sale in their original containers of five (5) gallons or less shall be exempt from requirements in RMC 4‐3‐050.H.2.d.i through vi and the requirements pertaining to removal of existing facilities in RMC 4‐3‐050.H.2.a.i. (b) Activities Exempt from Specified Wellhead Protection Areas Requirements: The following are exempt from requirements in RMC 4‐3‐ 050.G.8.b.vi.(a) through (d), the requirements pertaining to review of proposed facilities in RMC 4‐3‐050.C.5.d, Prohibited Changes in Land Use and Types of New Facilities – Wellhead Protection Areas, and the requirements pertaining to prohibited facilities in 4‐3‐050.G.8.b.iii(a). (1) Hazardous materials use, storage, and handling in de minimis amounts (aggregate quantities totaling twenty (20) gallons or less at the facility or construction site). Weights of solid hazardous materials will be converted to volumes for purposes of determining whether de minimis amounts are exceeded. Ten (10) pounds shall be considered equal to one (1) gallon. (2) Noncommercial residential use, storage, and handling of hazardous materials; provided, that no home occupation business (as defined by Chapter 4‐11 RMC) that uses, stores, or handles more than twenty (20) gallons of hazardous material is operated on the premises. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 172 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 77 (3) Hazardous materials in fuel tanks and fluid reservoirs attached to a private or commercial motor vehicle and used directly in the operation of that vehicle. (4) Fuel oil used in existing heating systems. (5) Hazardous materials used, stored, and handled by the City of Renton in water treatment processes and water system operations. (6) Fueling of equipment not licensed for street use; provided, that such fueling activities are conducted in a containment area that is designed and maintained to prevent hazardous materials from coming into contact with soil, surface water, or groundwater except for refueling associated with construction activity regulated by RMC 4‐3‐050.H.8, Construction Activity Standards – Zones 1 and 2. (7) Hazardous materials contained in properly operating sealed units (transformers, refrigeration units, etc.) that are not opened as part of routine use. (8) Hazardous materials in fuel tanks and fluid reservoirs attached to private or commercial equipment and used directly in the operation of that equipment. (9) Hazardous materials in aerosol cans. (10) Hazardous materials at multi‐family dwellings, hotels, motels, retirement homes, convalescent centers/nursing homes, mobile or manufactured home parks, group homes, and daycare family homes or centers 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 173 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 78 when used by owners and/or operators of such facilities for on‐site operation and maintenance purposes. (11) Hazardous materials used for janitorial purposes at the facility where the products are stored. (12) Hazardous materials used for personal care by workers or occupants of the facility at which the products are stored including but not limited to soaps, hair treatments, grooming aids, health aids, and medicines. (c) Uses, Facilities, and Activities in Zone 1 Modified Wellhead Protection Areas Exempt from Specified Wellhead Protection Areas Requirements: Facilities located in the Zone 1 Modified Wellhead Protection Areas are exempt from the following: (1) Prohibited facilities requirements in RMC 4‐3‐050. G.8.b.iii.(a) except that the storage, handling, use, treatment, and production of tetrachloroethylene (e.g., dry‐cleaning fluid) shall be prohibited; (2) Additional facility requirements in RMC 4‐3‐050. G.8.b.vi.(d); (3) Wastewater requirements in RMC 4‐6‐040.J.1.a but shall be subject to Zone 2 requirements in RMC 4‐6‐040.J.2; (4) The prohibition of septic systems; and (5) Surface water management requirements of RMC 4‐6‐ 030.E except that Zone 2 requirements contained in RMC 4‐6‐030.E shall apply. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 174 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 79 d. Use of Pesticides and Nitrates – All Wellhead Protection Areas: i. Use of Pesticides: The application of hazardous materials such as pesticides shall be allowed in a Wellhead Protection Area, except within one hundred feet (100') of a City owned well or two hundred feet (200') of a City owned spring; provided, that: (a) The application is in strict conformity with the use requirements as set forth by the EPA and as indicated on the containers in which the substances are sold. (b) Persons who are required to keep pesticide application records by RCW 17.21.100.1 and WAC 16‐228‐190 shall provide a copy of the required records to the Department within seventy‐two (72) hours of the application. ii. Fertilizers/Nitrate‐Containing Materials: The application of fertilizers containing nitrates shall be allowed in a Wellhead Protection Area except within one hundred feet (100') of a City owned well or two hundred feet (200') of a spring; provided, that: (a) No application of nitrate‐containing materials shall exceed one‐half (0.5) pound of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and a total yearly application of five (5) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet; except that an approved slow‐release nitrogen may be applied in quantities of up to nine‐tenths (0.9) pound of nitrogen per one 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 175 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 80 thousand (1,000) square feet per single application and eight (8) pounds of nitrogen per one thousand (1,000) square feet per year; and (b) Persons who apply fertilizer containing nitrates to more than one (1) contiguous acre of land located in the Wellhead Protection Area either in one (1) or multiple application(s) per year shall provide to the Department within seventy‐two (72) hours of any application the following information: (1) The name, address, and telephone number of the person applying the fertilizer; (2) The location and land area of the application; (3) The date and time of the application; (4) The product name and formulation; (5) The application rate. e. Wastewater Disposal Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4‐6‐040.J, Sanitary Sewer Standards, Additional Requirements that Apply within Zones 1 and 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area. f. Surface Water Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4‐6‐ 030.E, Drainage Plan Requirements and Methods of Analysis for additional surface water requirements applicable within Zones 1 and 2 of a Wellhead Protection Area. g. Pipeline Requirements: i. Pipeline Requirements – Zone 1: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 176 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 81 (a) Materials: All new and existing pipelines, as defined by RMC 4‐11‐160, in Zone 1 shall be constructed or repaired in accordance with material specifications contained in this Section. (b) Maintenance Required for Existing Pipelines: All existing product pipelines in Zone 1 shall be repaired and maintained in accordance with best management practices and best available technology. (c) Testing Required for New Pipelines: All new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 shall be tested for leakage in conformance with the following provisions prior to being placed into service. (1) Pipeline leakage testing shall be conducted in accordance with best available technology, to the satisfaction of the Department. (2) Pipeline leakage testing methods shall be submitted to the Department for review prior to testing and shall include a detailed description of the testing methods and technical assumptions; accuracy and precision of the test; proposed testing durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline to be tested; and scale drawings of the pipeline(s) to be tested. (3) Upon completion of testing, pipeline leakage testing results shall be submitted to the Department and shall include: record of testing durations, pressures, and lengths of pipeline tested; and weather conditions at the time of testing. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 177 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 82 (4) Routine leakage testing of new pipelines constructed in Zone 1 may be required by the Department. h. Construction Activity Standards – Zones 1 and 2: Persons engaged in construction activities as defined in RMC 4‐11‐030, Definitions C, shall comply with RMC 4‐3‐050.G.8. i. Fill Material Requirements – Zones 1 and 2: Refer to RMC 4‐4‐ 060.L.4, Fill Material – Zones 1 and 2, regarding quality of fill and fill material source statement requirements within Critical Aquifer Recharge Areas. j. Regulations for Existing Solid Waste Landfills – Zones 1 and 2: i. Materials: Earth materials used as fill or cover at a solid waste landfill shall meet the requirements of RMC 4‐4‐060.L.4, Fill Material. ii. Groundwater Monitoring: The Department shall have the authority to require an owner of a solid waste landfill to implement a groundwater monitoring program equal to that described by King County Board of Health Title 10 (King County Solid Waste Regulations) Section 10.72.020 and a corrective action program equal to that described by Section 10.72.030. The Department shall have the authority ascribed to the health officer in said regulations. Quarterly reports shall be provided to the Department detailing groundwater monitoring activity during the preceding three (3) months. Reports detailing corrective action required by the Department shall be submitted according to a written schedule approved by the Department. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 178 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 83 k. Fuel Oil Heating Systems – Zones 1 and 2: Owners of facilities and structures shall comply with RMC 4‐3‐050.C.5.d.ii.(i) and 4‐3‐050.C.5.d.iii(f), Prohibited Activities – Wellhead Protection Areas, Zones 1 and 2, relating to conversion of heating systems to fuel oil and installation of new fuel oil heating systems. 9. Wetlands: a. Applicability: Wetland regulations apply to sites containing or abutting wetlands, defined in RMC 4‐11‐230, as described below. The City categorizes wetlands according to the most current version of the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington. b. Delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands: i. Methodology: For the purpose of regulation, the exact location of the wetland edge shall be determined by the wetlands specialist hired at the expense of the applicant through the performance of a field investigation in accordance with the approved federal wetland delineation manual and applicable regional supplements. ii. Adjustments to Delineation by City: Where the applicant has provided a delineation of the wetland edge, the City shall review and may render adjustments to the edge delineation. In the event the adjusted edge delineation is contested by the applicant, the City shall, at the applicant’s expense, obtain the services of an additional qualified wetlands specialist to review the original study and render a final delineation. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 179 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 84 c. Wetland Categorization or Categorization System: The following categorization system is hereby adopted for the purposes of regulating wetlands in the City. The City may accept a dual wetland categorization for a wetland exhibiting a combination of Category I and II features or a combination of Category I and III features. The City will not accept a dual rating for a Category II wetland, such as a combined Category II and III rating. Dual ratings for a Category I wetland shall be consistent with the Washington State Wetland Rating System for Western Washington – 2014 Update (October 2014), or as amended hereafter. Wetlands buffer widths, replacement ratios and avoidance criteria shall be based on the following ratings: (a) Category I Wetlands: Category I wetlands are those wetlands of exceptional value in terms of protecting water quality, storing flood and stormwater, and/or providing habitat for wildlife as indicated by a rating system score of twenty‐three (23) points or more on the state rating system referenced above. These are wetland communities of infrequent occurrence that often provide documented habitat for critical, threatened or endangered species, and/or have other attributes that are very difficult or impossible to replace if altered. (b) Category II Wetlands: Category II wetlands have significant value based on their function as indicated by a rating system score of between twenty (20) and twenty‐two (22) points. They do not meet the criteria for 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 180 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 85 Category I rating but occur infrequently and have qualities that are difficult to replace if altered. (c) Category III Wetlands: Category III wetlands have important resource value as indicated by a rating system score of between sixteen (16) and nineteen (19) points. (d) Category IV Wetlands: Category IV wetlands are wetlands of limited resource value as indicated by a rating system score between nine (9) and fifteen (15) points. They typically have vegetation of similar age and class, lack special habitat features, and/or are isolated or disconnected from other aquatic systems or high quality upland habitats. d. Wetland Buffers: i. Standard Buffer Widths: See RMC 4‐3‐050.G.2, Critical Area Buffers and Structure Setbacks from Buffers. ii. Independent Buffer Study: The Administrator shall have the authority to approve proposed alternate buffer widths based on a qualified professional’s wetland study, provided the criteria below are met. Determinations made by the Administrator pursuant to this subsection may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 181 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 86 (a) The applicant funds the wetland study; and (b) The wetland study shows why the standard buffer widths are unnecessary and how the proposed alternate buffer will provide an equivalent ecological protection as provided by the City standards; and (c) The wetland study demonstrates how it meets best available science as identified in Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science (Ecology Publication #05‐06‐006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #04‐06‐008, April 2005). iii. Measurement of Buffers: All buffers shall be measured from the wetland boundary as surveyed in the field pursuant to the requirements of this subsection. iv. Increased Wetland Buffer Width: Each applicant shall document in the required wetland assessments whether the criteria in RMC 4‐3‐ 050.G.9.d are or are not met and increased wetland buffers are warranted. Based on the applicant’s report or third party review, increased standard buffer widths may be required in unique cases Such determination shall be attached as a condition of project approval. Unique cases shall include but not be limited to: (a) The wetland is used by species listed by the federal or the state government as threatened, endangered and sensitive species and State‐ listed priority species, essential habitat for those species or has unusual nesting 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 182 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 87 or resting sites such as heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees or evidence thereof; or (b) The buffer or adjacent uplands have a slope greater than fifteen percent (15%) or is susceptible to erosion and standard erosion control measures will not effectively prevent adverse wetland impacts. (c) The area is very fragile, or when a larger buffer is necessary to protect wetlands functions and values. e. Cooperative Wetland Compensation: Mitigation Banks, In‐Lieu Fee Programs, or Special Area Management Programs (SAMP): i. Applicability: The City encourages and will facilitate and approve cooperative projects wherein a single applicant or other organization with demonstrated capability may undertake a compensation project under the following circumstances: (a) Restoration or creation on‐site may not be feasible due to problems with hydrology, soils, or other factors; or (b) Where the cooperative plan is shown to better meet established regional goals for flood storage, flood conveyance, habitat or other wetland functions. ii. Process: Applicants proposing a cooperative compensation project shall: (a) Submit a permit application; (b) Demonstrate compliance with all standards; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 183 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 88 (c) Demonstrate that long‐term management will be provided; and (d) Demonstrate agreement for the project from all affected property owners of record. iii. Mitigation Banks: Mitigation banks are defined as sites which may be used for restoration, creation and/or mitigation of wetland alternatives from a different piece of property than the property to be altered within the same drainage basin. The City of Renton maintains a mitigation bank. A list of City mitigation bank sites is maintained by the Public Works Department. With the approval of Administrator and the Public Works Department, non‐City‐ controlled mitigation banks may be established and utilized. If credits are from a mitigation bank are to be used for federal or state permits, the bank must be certified under state rules. If approved, compensation payments received as part of a mitigation or creation bank must be received prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. iv. In‐Lieu Fee Programs: In‐Lieu Fee mitigation involves the restoration, creation, enhancement, or preservation of aquatic resources through funds paid to a governmental or non‐profit natural resources management entity to satisfy compensatory mitigation for federal, state, and local permits. Both the US Army Corps of Engineers (33 CFR Parts 325 and 332) and Washington State (WAC 173‐700) support the use of in‐lieu fee programs. The City of Renton is located within the service area of the King County 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 184 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 89 Mitigation Reserves In‐Lieu Fee Program, which may be used by applicants with the approval of the Administrator and Public Works Department provided the mitigation occurs within the City of Renton and the same drainage basin. v. Special Area Management Programs: Special area management programs are those wetland programs agreed upon through an interjurisdictional planning process involving the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Washington State Department of Ecology, any affected counties and/or cities, private property owners and other parties of interest. The outcome of the process is a regional wetlands permit representing a plan of action for all wetlands within the special area. H. ALTERATIONS TO CRITICAL AREAS AND/OR BUFFERS – GENERAL REQUIREMENTS: 1. General Purpose: The typically required critical area buffers may be reduced to no less than the minimums set forth in this subsection where the City is able to verify that the proposal will result in no net loss of functions or values as documented in a study prepared by a qualified professional. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.K. 2. Authority and Documentation of Required Findings: Based upon an applicant’s request, and the acceptance of a wetland and/or stream or lake study, mitigation and enhancement plan, the Administrator may approve an alteration to the minimum buffer widths where the applicant can demonstrate that through enhancing the buffer and the use of low impact development 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 185 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 90 strategies the reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer. Determinations and evidence shall be included in the application file. The City shall also evaluate all proposals using the following criteria, in the order below. The development plan will: a. Avoid any disturbances to the critical area or buffer; b. Minimize any critical area or buffer impacts; c. Compensate for any critical area or buffer impacts; d. Restore any critical area or buffer temporarily impacted or lost; e. Create new critical areas and buffers for those lost; and f. Enhance an existing degraded buffer to compensate for lost functions and values in addition to restoring or creating a critical area. 3. Studies Required: The City’s determination shall be based on specific site studies by recognized experts. 4. Surety, Mitigation, and Monitoring Required: The City will require long‐term monitoring of the project pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.L.3. 5. Corrective Actions Required: Corrective actions will be required if adverse impacts to critical areas or buffers are discovered during the monitoring period. 6. Public Notice Required: Public notification shall be given as follows: a. For applications that are not otherwise subject to notices of application pursuant to Chapter 4‐8 RMC, notice of the critical area and/or buffer alteration shall be given by posting the site and notifying abutting or 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 186 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 91 adjacent property owners with the potential to be impacted, in accordance with Chapter 4‐8 RMC. Upon determination by the Administrator to allow or disallow an alteration, notification of parties of record, if any, shall be made. b. For applications that are subject to notices of application, the critical area and/or buffer alteration or request for determination to allow an alteration shall be included with notice of application. If the determination to allow or disallow an alteration of the mitigation requirements is not known at the time of the notice of application, written notice to abutting or adjacent property owners shall be given instead at the time of the SEPA determination. Upon determination to allow or disallow an alteration, notification of parties of record, if any, shall be made. I. ALTERATIONS TO CRITICAL AREAS BUFFERS: 1. Maximum Permissible Administrative Alterations to Critical Areas Buffers ‐ Alteration of Critical Area Buffers: The required critical area buffers may be reduced to no less than the minimums set forth in this subsection. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance pursuant to RMC 4‐ 3‐050.G.4. Critical Area Category or Type Reduced Buffer: Minimum Widths Possible Averaged Buffer: Minimum Widths Possible Geologically Hazardous Areas Landslide Hazard Areas: Very High Based on City acceptance of a geotechnical report1 N/A Streams and Lakes 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 187 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 92 Type F 90 feet2 75 feet3 Type Np 60 feet2 37.5 feet3 Type Ns 40 feet2 25 feet3 Wetlands Wetland buffer widths shall be reduced by no more than 25% of the buffer required in Subsection G of this Section. 1. Subject to approval pursuant to the criteria in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.5.h.ii. 2. Subject to approval pursuant to the criteria in RMC 4‐3‐050.I.2.a. 3. Subject to approval pursuant to the criteria in RMC 4‐3‐050.I.2.b. 2. STREAMS: a. Criteria for Reduction of Degraded Stream Buffer Width with Enhancement: A reduced buffer will be approved in a degraded stream buffer only if: i. It will provide an overall improvement in water quality; and ii. It will provide an overall enhancement to fish, wildlife, or their habitat; and iii. It will provide a net improvement in drainage and/or stormwater detention capabilities; and iv. It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the City as a whole; and v. It will provide all exposed areas with stabilized native vegetation, as appropriate; and vi. The request is not made in conjunction with buffer reduction, and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 188 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 93 vii. It will provide, as part of the buffer reduction request, buffer enhancement plan prepared by a qualified professional and fund a review of the plan by the City’s consultant. The plan shall assess habitat, water quality, stormwater detention, groundwater recharge, shoreline protection, and erosion protection functions of the buffer; assess the effects of the proposed modification on those functions; and address the six criteria listed above. b. Criteria for Approval of Averaged Stream Buffer: Buffer width averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and ii. Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and iii. The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging; and iv. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; and v. Where the buffer width is reduced by averaging pursuant to this subsection, buffer enhancement shall be required. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 189 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 94 c. Criteria for Approval of Reduced Buffer for Type Np and Ns Streams to be Daylighted: An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification as follows: i. Modifications may be requested for a reduction in stream buffers for Type Np and Ns watercourses proposed to be daylighted, below the stream buffer reduction levels of RMC 4‐3‐050.I.1. ii. In addition to the criteria of RMC 4‐9‐250.D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: (a) The buffer is lowered only to the amount necessary to achieve the same amount of development as without the daylighting; and (b) The buffer width is no less than fifty feet (50') on a Type Np watercourse and twenty‐five feet (25') on a Type Ns watercourse; and (c) The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905. 3. WETLANDS: a. Criteria for reduction of wetland buffer width with enhancement: The reviewing official must find that the proposal meets all the following criteria: i. The reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer; and ii. An enhanced buffer shall never be less than seventy‐five (75%) of the standard width at its narrowest point; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 190 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 95 iii. The buffer area has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes and no direct or indirect, short‐term or long‐term, adverse impacts to regulated wetlands, as determined by the City, and iv. The proposal shall rely upon a site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science (Ecology Publication #05‐06‐006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #04‐06‐008, April 2005), or similar approaches; and v. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; and b. Criteria for averaging of wetland buffer width: Averaging may be allowed only where the applicant demonstrates all of the following: i. There are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and ii. That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and iii. That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and iv. A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 191 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 96 the Science (Ecology Publication #05‐06‐006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #04‐06‐008, April 2005), or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; and v. In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than seventy‐five percent (75%) of the standard buffer. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance pursuant to RMC 4‐9‐250.B; and vi. Buffer enhancement in the areas where the buffer is reduced shall be required on a case‐by‐case basis where appropriate to site conditions, wetland sensitivity, and proposed land development characteristics. J. ALTERATIONS TO CRITICAL AREAS: 1. Criteria for Modifying Geologically Hazardous Area Standards: a. An applicant may request that the Administrator grant a modification to allow: i. Regrading of any slope which was created through previous mineral and natural resource recovery activities or was created prior to adoption of applicable mineral and natural resource recovery regulations or through public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement, or public or private utility installation activities; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 192 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 97 ii. Filling against the toe of a natural rock wall or rock wall created through mineral and natural resource recovery activities or through public or private road installation or widening and related transportation improvements, railroad track installation or improvement or public or private utility installation activities; and/or b. Process: The following procedures shall apply to any of the above activities: i. The applicant shall submit a geotechnical report describing any potential impacts of the proposed modification and any necessary mitigation measures; ii. All submitted reports shall be independently reviewed by qualified specialists selected by the City at the applicant’s expense; iii. The Administrator may grant, condition, or deny the request based upon the proposal’s compliance with the applicable modification criteria of RMC 4‐9‐250.D; and iv. Any slope which remains forty percent (40%) or steeper following site development shall be subject to all applicable geologic hazard regulations for steep slopes and landslide hazards, in this Section; and v. In addition to the criteria of RMC 4‐9‐250.D, Modification Procedures, the following criteria shall apply: The proposed modification is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐ 195‐905. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 193 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 98 2. Alterations Within Streams and Lakes or Associated Buffers. a. Criteria for Administrative Approval of Transportation Crossings in Stream/Lake or Buffer Areas: Construction of vehicular or non‐vehicular transportation crossings may be permitted in accordance with an approved stream/lake study subject to the following criteria: i. The proposed route is determined to have the least impact on the environment, while meeting City Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element requirements and standards in RMC 4‐6‐060; and ii. The crossing minimizes interruption of downstream movement of wood and gravel; and iii. Transportation facilities in buffer areas shall not run parallel to the water body; and iv. Crossings occur as near to perpendicular with the water body as possible; and v. Crossings are designed according to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Fish Water Crossing Design Guidelines, 2013 and the National Marine Fisheries Service Guidelines for Salmonid Passage at Stream Crossings, 2000, as may be updated, or equivalent manuals as determined by the Administrator; and vi. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and vii. Mitigation criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.L are met. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 194 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 99 b. Criteria for Administrative Approval of Utilities in Stream/Lake or Buffer: New utility lines and facilities may be permitted to cross water bodies in accordance with an approved stream/lake study, if they comply with the following criteria: i. Fish and wildlife habitat areas shall be avoided to the maximum extent possible; and ii. The utility is designed consistent with one or more of the following methods: (a) Installation shall be accomplished by boring beneath the scour depth and hyporheic zone of the water body and channel migration zone; or (b) The utilities shall cross at an angle greater than sixty (60) degrees to the centerline of the channel in streams or perpendicular to the channel centerline; or (c) Crossings shall be contained within the footprint of an existing road or utility crossing; and iii. New utility routes shall avoid paralleling the stream or following a down‐valley course near the channel; and iv. The utility installation shall not increase or decrease the natural rate of shore migration or channel migration; and v. Seasonal work windows are determined and made a condition of approval; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 195 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 100 vi. Mitigation criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.L are met. c. Administrative Approval of In‐Water Structures or In‐Water Work: In accordance with an approved stream or lake study, in‐water structures or work may be permitted, subject to the following: In‐stream structures, such as, but not limited to, in‐stream ponds, retention and detention facilities, tide gates, dams, and weirs, shall be allowed as part of an approved watershed basin restoration project approved by the City of Renton, and in accordance with mitigation criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.LThe applicant will obtain and comply with state or federal permits and requirements. d. Administrative Approval of Dredging: Dredging may be permitted only when: i. Dredging is necessary for flood hazard areas reduction purposes, if a definite flood hazard area would exist unless dredging were permitted; or ii. Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life; or iii. Dredging is associated with a stream habitat enhancement or creation project not otherwise exempt in RMC 4‐3‐050.C; or iv. Dredging is necessary to protect public facilities; or v. Dredging is required as a maintenance and operation condition of a federally funded flood hazard areas reduction project or a hazard mitigation project; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 196 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 101 vi. Dredging is done so as to meet applicable mitigation criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.L. e. Administrative Approval of Stream Relocation: Stream relocation may be allowed when analyzed in an accepted stream or lake assessment, and when the following criteria and conditions are met: i. Stream relocation may only be permitted if associated with: (a) A public flood hazard areas reduction/habitat enhancement project approved by appropriate state and/or federal agencies; or (b) Expansion of public road or other public facility improvements where no feasible alternative exists; or (c) A public or private proposal restoring a water body and resulting in a net benefit to on‐ or off‐site habitat and species. ii. The following conditions also apply to any stream relocation proposal meeting one or more of the above criteria: (a) Buffer widths shall be based upon the new stream location; provided, that the buffer widths may be reduced or averaged if meeting criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.I or RMC 4‐3‐050.J. Where minimum required buffer widths are not feasible for stream relocation proposals that are the result of activities pursuant to criteria in RMC 4‐3‐050.J, other equivalent on‐ or off‐site compensation to achieve no‐net‐loss of riparian function is provided; (b) When Type Ns streams, as defined in subsection F.7 of these regulations, are proposed for relocation due to expansions of public roads 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 197 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 102 or other public facility improvements pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.J), the buffer area between the facility and the relocated stream shall not be less than the width prior to the relocation. The provided buffer between the facility and the relocated stream shall be enhanced or improved to provide appropriate functions given the class and condition of the stream; or if there is no buffer currently, other equivalent on‐ or off‐site compensation to achieve no net loss of riparian functions is provided. (c) Applicable mitigation criteria of RMC 4‐3‐050.L must be met. (d) Proper notification to the City must be made and records provided to the City of stream relocations, pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.D, in cases where the stream/lake is subject to flood hazard area regulations of this section. 3. Criteria for Modifying Wellhead Protection Area standards: The Department will consider modification applications in the following cases: a. The request is to find that a standard is inapplicable to that activity, facility, or development permit due to the applicant’s proposed methods or location; or b. The request is to modify a specific standard or regulation due to practical difficulties; and c. The request meets the intent and purpose of the Wellhead Protection Area regulations. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 198 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 103 Based upon application of the tests above in RMC 4‐3‐050.J.3.a, b, and c, applications which are considered appropriate for review as modifications are subject to the procedures and criteria in RMC 4‐9‐250.D, Modification Procedures. Requests to modify regulations or standards which do not meet the above tests shall be processed as variances. d. The request, in addition to meeting the criteria of RMC 4‐9‐250.D, Modification Procedures, must be based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4‐9‐250.F are followed. 4. Criteria for approving wetland alterations: Wetland alterations may only be authorized after the City makes a written finding that the proposal is consistent with the following criteria: a. No Net Loss: Activities that adversely affect wetlands and/or wetland buffers shall include mitigation sufficient to achieve no net loss of wetland function and acreage and to achieve, where practicable a net resource gain in wetlands over present conditions. The concept of “no netloss” means to create, restore and/or enhance a wetland so that there is no reduction to total wetland acreage and/or function. b. Compensation for wetland alterations shall occur in the following order of preference: i. Re‐establishing wetlands on upland sites that were formerly wetlands. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 199 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 104 ii. Rehabilitating wetlands for the purposes of repairing or restoring natural and/or historic functions. iii. Creating wetlands on disturbed upland sites such as those consisting primarily of nonnative, invasive plant species. iv. Enhancing significantly degraded wetlands. v. Preserving Category I or II wetlands that are under imminent threat; provided, that preservation shall only be allowed in combination with other forms of mitigation and when the Administrator determines that the overall mitigation package fully replaces the functions and values lost due to development. vi. Cooperative compensation to mitigation banks or in‐lieu fee programs, as indicated in subsection 9.e of this section. c. Mitigation Ratios for Wetland Impacts: Compensatory mitigation for wetland alterations shall be based on the wetland category and the type of mitigation activity proposed. The replacement ratio shall be determined according to the ratios provided in the table below. The created, re‐established, rehabilitated, or enhanced wetland area shall at a minimum provide a level of functions equivalent to the wetland being altered and shall be located in an appropriate landscape setting. Wetland Mitigation Type and Replacement Ratio* Wetland Category** Creation or Re‐establishment Rehabilitation Enhancement Only Category IV 1.5:1 2:1 3:1 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 200 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 105 Category III 2:1 3:1 4:1 Category II 3:1 4:1 6:1 Category I 6:1 8:1 Not allowed *Ratio is the replacement area: impact area. **As defined in RMC 4‐3‐050.G d. Mitigation Ratios for Wetland Buffer Impacts: Compensation for wetland buffer impacts shall occur at a minimum one to one (1:1) ratio. Compensatory mitigation for buffer impacts shall include enhancement of degraded buffers by planting native species, removing structures and impervious surfaces within buffers, and other measures. e. Special Requirements for Mitigation Banks: Mitigation banks shall not be subject to the replacement ratios outlined in the replacement ratio table above, but shall be determined as part of the mitigation banking agreement and certification process. f. Buffer Requirements for Replacement Wetlands: Replacement wetlands established pursuant to these mitigation provisions shall have adequate buffers to ensure their protection and sustainability. The buffer shall be based on the category in RMC 4‐3‐050.G.2. g. Location: Compensatory mitigation shall be provided on‐site or off‐ site in the location that will provide the greatest ecological benefit and have the greatest likelihood of success. Mitigation shall occur as close as possible to the impact area , within the same watershed sub‐basin, and in a similar habitat type as the permitted alteration unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Administrator through a watershed‐or landscaped‐based analysis that 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 201 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 106 mitigation within an alternative sub‐basin of the same watershed would have greater ecological benefit. h. Protection: All mitigation areas whether on‐ or off‐site shall be permanently protected and managed to prevent degradation and ensure protection of critical area functions and values into perpetuity. Permanent protection shall be achieved through protective covenant in accordance with RMC 4‐3‐050. K. VARIANCES: See RMC 4‐9‐250. L. MITIGATION, MAINTENANCE AND MONITORING: 1. Mitigation Plan Required: a. Criteria: Mitigation plans required through the application of RMC 4‐3‐050.G.4 to 4‐3‐050.G.9 shall comply with RMC 4‐8. In addition, the applicant shall: i. Demonstrate sufficient scientific expertise, the supervisory capability, and the financial resources to carry out the mitigation project; and ii. Demonstrate the capability for monitoring the site and making corrections during the monitoring period if the mitigation project fails to meet projected goals; and iii. Protect and manage, or provide for the protection and management, of the mitigation area to avoid further development or degradation and to provide for long‐term environmental health of the mitigation area; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 202 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 107 iv. Provide for project monitoring and allow City inspections; and v. Avoid mitigation proposals that would result in additional future mitigation or regulatory requirements for adjacent or abutting properties. b. Mitigation Sequencing: If alterations to critical areas are proposed for a non‐exempt activity, the applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order and provide reasons why a less intrusive method of development is not feasible. In determining whether to grant permit approval pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.C, a determination shall be made as to whether the feasibility of less intrusive methods of development have been adequately evaluated and that less intrusive methods of development are not feasible. i. Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action (usually by either finding another site or changing the location on the site). ii. Minimizing adverse impacts by limiting the magnitude of the action and its implementation, by using appropriate technology, or by taking affirmative steps, such as project redesign, relocation, or timing, to avoid or reduce impacts. iii. Rectifying adverse impacts to wetlands, Wellhead Protection Areas, flood hazard areas, and habitat conservation areas by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment to the historical conditions or the conditions existing at the time of the initiation of the project. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 203 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 108 iv. Minimizing or eliminating the hazard by restoring or stabilizing the hazard area through engineered or other methods. v. Reducing or eliminating the adverse impacts or hazard over time by preservation and maintenance operations over the life of the action. vi. Compensating for adverse impacts to wetlands, Wellhead Protection Areas, flood hazard areas, and habitat conservation areas by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments. vii. Monitoring the hazard or other required mitigation and taking remedial action when necessary. c. Based on Best Available Science: The applicant shall demonstrate that the mitigation is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; or where there is an absence of valid scientific information, the steps in RMC 4‐9‐250.F are followed. d. Mitigation Alternatives and Location: i. On‐Site Mitigation: Mitigation shall be provided on‐site, unless on‐site mitigation is not scientifically feasible due to physical features of the property. The burden of proof shall be on the applicant to demonstrate that mitigation cannot be provided on‐site. ii. Off‐Site Mitigation: When mitigation cannot be provided on‐ site, mitigation shall be provided in the immediate vicinity of the permitted activity on property owned or controlled by the applicant, and identified as such 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 204 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 109 through a recorded document such as an easement or covenant, provided such mitigation is beneficial to the habitat area and associated resources. iii. In‐Kind Mitigation: In‐kind mitigation shall be provided except when the applicant demonstrates and the City concurs that greater functional and habitat value can be achieved through out‐of‐kind mitigation. e. Timing of Mitigation Plan – Final Submittal and Mitigation Commencement: When a mitigation plan is required, the proponent shall submit a final mitigation plan for the approval of the Administrator prior to the issuance of building or construction permits for development. The proponent shall receive written approval of the mitigation plan prior to commencement of any construction activity. Where the City requires increased buffers rather than standard buffers, it shall be noted on the subdivision plan and/or site plan. f. Timing of Construction and/or Building Permit Issuance: In order to ensure no loss of critical area functions and values, development permits shall not be issued prior to installation and acceptance of all required mitigation unless a surety device in an amount of three hundred percent (300%) of the mitigation installation contract amount is provided to the satisfaction of the City. Mitigation activities shall be timed to occur in the appropriate season based on weather and moisture conditions. g. When Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan is Required: The applicant shall be required to conduct a stream or lake mitigation plan pursuant to RMC 4‐ 8‐120 if impacts are identified within a stream or lake study. The approval of the 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 205 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 110 stream or lake mitigation plan by the Administrator shall be based on the following criteria. i. Mitigation Location: Mitigation location shall follow the preferences in RMC 4‐3‐050.L: (a) On Site Mitigation: On‐site mitigation is required unless a finding is made that on‐site mitigation is not feasible or desirable; (b) Off‐Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Subbasin as Subject Site: Off‐site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage subbasin as the subject site and if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation on the subject site; (c) Off‐Site Mitigation within Same Drainage Basin within City Limits: Off‐site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions within the City over mitigation within the same drainage subbasin as the project; (d) Off‐Site Mitigation within the Same Drainage Basin Outside the City Limits: Off‐site mitigation may be allowed when located within the same drainage basin outside the Renton City limits if it achieves equal or improved ecological functions over mitigation within the same drainage basin within the Renton City limits and it meets City goals. ii. Mitigation Type: In all cases, mitigation shall provide for equivalent or greater biological functions pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1.g.i.(e). 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 206 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 111 Additionally, there shall be no net loss of riparian area or shoreline ecological function resulting from any activity or land use occurring within the regulated buffer area. Types of mitigation shall follow the preferences in RMC 4‐3‐050.L: (a) Daylighting (returning to open channel) of streams or removal of manmade salmonid migration barriers; (b) Removal of impervious surfaces in buffer areas and improved biological function of the buffer; (c) In‐stream or in‐lake mitigation as part of an approved watershed basin restoration project; (d) Other mitigation suitable for site and water body conditions that meet all other provisions for a mitigation plan. iii. Contiguous Corridors: Mitigation sites shall be located to preserve or achieve contiguous riparian or wildlife corridors to minimize the isolating effects of development on habitat areas, so long as mitigation of aquatic habitat is located within the same aquatic ecosystem as the area disturbed. (a) Equivalent or Greater Biological Functions: The Administrator shall utilize the report “City of Renton Best Available Science Literature Review and Stream Buffer Recommendations” by AC Kindig & Company and Cedarock Consultants, dated February 27, 2003, unless superseded with a City‐adopted study, to determine the existing or potential ecological function of the stream or lake or riparian habitat that is being 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 207 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 112 affected. Alternate reports or literature that meet Best Available Science may be utilized as supplemental information in order to ensure the Administrators determination reflects current science and analysis. Mitigation shall address each function affected by the alteration. Mitigation to compensate alterations to stream/lake areas and associated buffers shall achieve equivalent or greater biologic and hydrologic functions and shall include mitigation for adverse impacts upstream or downstream of the development proposal site. No net loss of riparian habitat or water body function shall be demonstrated. (b) Minimum Mitigation Plan Performance Standards: See RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1. iv. Alternative Mitigation: The mitigation requirements set forth in this subsection 4‐3‐050.L.1 may be modified at the Administrator’s discretion if the applicant demonstrates that improved habitat functions, on a per function basis, can be obtained in the affected sub‐drainage basin as a result of alternative mitigation measures. 2. Surety Devices: a. Required for Mitigation Plans: For any mitigation plans required as a result of the application of these regulations, a surety device shall be required to ensure performance consistent with RMC 4‐1‐230. The King County Critical Areas Mitigation Bond Quantity Worksheet may be used by applicants to determine appropriate amounts sufficient to cover the cost of conformance with the conditions of this section, including corrective measures associated with 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 208 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 113 work that is not completed. After the Administrator determines that mitigation has been successfully completed in compliance with the approved mitigation plan and the monitoring period has expired, the surety device shall be released. The City may collect against the surety device and require the property owner to sign a property access release form when work, which is not completed, is found to be in violation of the conditions set forth in the mitigation plan and/or the Administrator determines that the site is in violation of the purposes of this section. b. Time Period: The surety device shall be sufficient to guarantee that structures, improvements, and mitigation required by permit condition perform satisfactorily for a minimum of five (5) years after they have been completed. 3. Monitoring: All compensatory mitigation projects shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but generally not for a period less than five (5) years. Reports for wetland mitigation projects shall be submitted quarterly for the first year and thereafter annually for the next four (4) years following construction for a total of five (5) years minimum. Subsequent reporting shall be required if applicable to document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensatory mitigation. Should the mitigation project fail to meet established success criteria at any point, the monitoring period shall be started over at year 1. The Administrator shall have the authority to modify or extend the monitoring 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 209 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 114 period and require additional monitoring reports for up to ten (10) years when any of the following conditions apply: a. The project does not meet the performance standards identified in the mitigation plan; b. The project does not provide adequate replacement for the functions and values of the impacted critical area; c. The project involves establishment of forested plant communities, which require longer time for establishment. M. APPEALS: 1. General: See RMC 4‐8‐070, Authority and Responsibilities, and RMC 4‐ 8‐110. 2. Record Required – Flood Hazard Areas: See RMC 4‐9‐250.B. N. UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT 1. Stop Work Order: When a critical area or its buffer has been altered in violation of this Title, all ongoing development work shall stop. The City shall have the authority to issue a stop work order to cease all ongoing development work, and order restoration, rehabilitation, or replacement measures at the owner's or other responsible party's expense to compensate for violation of provisions of this Title. 2. Requirement and Timing for Restoration Plan and Site Restoration: All development work shall remain stopped until a restoration plan is prepared and approved by City. Such a plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 210 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 115 using the best available science and shall describe how the actions proposed meet the minimum requirements described in RMC 4‐3‐050.N.3. The Administrator shall, at the violator’s expense, seek expert advice in determining the adequacy of the plan. Inadequate plans shall be returned to the applicant or violator for revision and resubmittal. Once the restoration plan has been approved by the City, the applicant must implement the plan to the satisfaction of the City prior to recommencing development activity. 3. Minimum Performance Standards for Restoration: Information demonstrating compliance with the requirements in RMC 4‐3‐050.L shall be submitted to the Administrator. The following minimum performance standards shall be met for the restoration of a critical area, provided that if the violator can demonstrate that greater functional and habitat values can be obtained, these standards may be modified: a. Wellhead Protection Areas, flood hazard areas, wetlands, and Habitat Conservation Areas: i. The historic structural and functional values shall be restored, including water quality and habitat functions; ii. The historic soil types and configuration shall be replicated; iii. The critical area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation that replicates the vegetation historically found on the site in species types, sizes, and densities. The historic functions and values should be replicated at the location of the alteration; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 211 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 116 b. Geologic hazards: i. The hazard shall be reduced to a level equal to, or less than, the pre‐development hazard; ii. Any risk of personal injury resulting from the alteration shall be eliminated or minimized; and iii. The hazard area and buffers shall be replanted with native vegetation sufficient to minimize the hazard. 4. Site Investigations Authorized: The Administrator is authorized to make site inspections and take such actions as are necessary to enforce this Title. The Administrator shall present proper credentials and make a reasonable effort to contact any property owner before entering onto private property. 5. Penalties: See RMC 4‐3‐120 and RMC 4‐1. SECTION III. Section 4‐3‐120, Violations of the Chapter and Penalties, of Chapter 3, Environmental Regulations and Overlay Districts, of Title IV (Development Regulations, of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: 4‐3‐120 VIOLATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND PENALTIES: A. ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: The Development Services Administrator or his or her designated representative shall be responsible for investigation of violation and citation of the violating parties issuance of an infraction notice, stop work order or referral to the City Attorney’s office for filing of criminal charges, as the case may be. B. VIOLATION OF THIS CHAPTER AND PENALTIES: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 212 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 117 Unless otherwise specified Except for violations of the Adult Retail and Entertainment Regulations, violations of this Chapter are misdemeanors civil infractions subject to RMC 1‐3‐1. Any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity violating any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be guilty of a civil infraction for the first through third offenses. Each day or portion of a day during which a violation of this Chapter is committed or continued shall constitute a separate offense. Any development carried out contrary to the provisions of this Chapter shall constitute a public nuisance and may be enjoined as provided by the statutes of the state of Washington. The City may levy civil penalties against any person, party, firm, corporation, or other legal entity for violation of any of the provisions of this Chapter. The civil penalty shall be assessed at a rate of one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) to five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) per day per violation depending on the severity of the violation. The Administrator may waive the penalty for a first offence. Penalties for subsequent violations by the same entity shall be assessed at a rate of five thousand dollars ($5,000.00) to ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00) per day depending on the severity of the violation. After the third violation, subsequent violations shall be handled as misdemeanors. C. TESTS: 1. Whenever there is insufficient evidence of compliance with any of the provisions of RMC 4‐3‐050, Critical Areas Regulations, or evidence that any action does not conform to the requirements of RMC 4‐3‐050, the Administrator 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 213 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 118 may require tests as proof of compliance to be made at no expense to this jurisdiction. 2. Test methods shall be as specified by RMC 4‐3‐050, Critical Areas Regulations, or by other recognized and accepted test standards. If there are no recognized or accepted test methods for the proposed alternate, the Administrator shall determine test procedures. SECTION IV. The definition of “Biological Assessment/Critical Area Study” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.2, Definitions B, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: Biological Assessment/Critical Area Study: Projects with the potential to impact fish (Chinook salmon, bull trout, steelhead trout), unexpected, new, rare or other endangered species habitat (bald eagles) shall provide a biological assessment/critical area study. The purpose of this assessment is to determine whether a proposed action is likely to: (1) adversely affect listed or de‐listed species or designated critical habitat; (2) jeopardize the continued existence of species that are proposed for listing, or unexpected, new or rare species; or (3) adversely modify proposed critical habitat. A biological assessment/critical area study is a written study that evaluates the proposal, all probable impacts and risks related to the critical area, and recommends appropriate mitigation measures to adequately protect the functions and values of the critical area, and preserve anadromous fish and their habitat. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 214 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 119 The assessment/study shall be prepared by a person with experience and training in the scientific discipline appropriate for the relevant critical area in accordance with WAC 365‐195‐095(4), as it exists or may be amended. A qualified professional must have obtained a B.S. or B.A. or equivalent degree in biology, engineering, environmental studies, fisheries, geomorphology, biological assessment, or related field, and have at least five (5) years of related work experience. a. A qualified professional for wetlands must be a professional wetland scientist with at least two (2) years of full‐time work experience as a wetlands professional, including delineating wetlands using the federal manuals and supplements, preparing wetlands reports, conducting function assessments, and developing and implementing mitigation plans. b. A qualified professional for Fish and Wildlife hHabitat conservation must have a degree in biology or a related degree and professional experience related to the subject species. c. A qualified professional for a geological hazard must be a professional engineer or geologist, licensed in the state of Washington. d. A qualified professional for critical aquifer recharge areas Wellhead Protection Areas means a hydrogeologist, geologist, engineer, or other scientist with experience in preparing hydrogeologic assessments. The assessment/study shall use scientifically valid methods and studies in the analysis of critical area data and field reconnaissance and reference the source of 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 215 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 120 the material used. Best available science is that scientific information applicable to the critical area prepared by local state or federal natural agencies or a qualified scientific professional that is consistent with the criteria established in WAC 395‐195‐900 through 365‐195‐925, as they exist or may be amended. The assessment/study shall contain, at a minimum, the following information, as applicable: a. The name and contact information of the applicant; b. The dates, names, and qualifications of the persons preparing the assessment/study and documentation of any fieldwork performed on the site; c. A description of the proposal and identification of the permits requested; d. A site plan showing: i. Identified critical areas, buffers and the development proposal with dimensions; ii. Topography at two (2) foot intervals; iii. Limits of any areas to be cleared/impacted; and iv. A description of the proposed stormwater management plan for the development and consideration of impacts to drainage alterations; e. Accurate identification, location, and characterization of critical areas, water bodies, and buffers adjacent to the proposed project area or potentially impacted by the proposed project; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 216 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 121 f. A statement specifying the accuracy of the assessment/study, assumptions used in the assessment/study, and explaining how best available science has been incorporated; g. Determination of the degree of hazard and risk from the proposal both on the site and on surrounding properties; h. An assessment of the probable cumulative impacts to the critical areas, their buffers and other properties resulting from the proposal; i. An evaluation of the project’s compliance with sections 7 and 9 of the Endangered Species Act; j. A description of reasonable efforts made to apply mitigation sequencing to avoid, minimize, and mitigate impacts to critical areas; k. Plans for adequate mitigation to offset any impacts and an explanation of how best management practices will be used to minimize impacts to critical area; and l. Recommendations for maintenance, short‐term and long‐term monitoring, contingency plans and security requirements. SECTION V. Subsection d of the definition of “Final Plat Plan” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.6, Definitions F, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. d. Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. Clearly delineate 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 217 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 122 the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width. SECTION VI. Subsection n of the definition of “Lot Line Adjustment Map” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.12, Definitions L, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. n. Location of existing conditions (such as wetlands, steep slopes, watercourses) on or adjacent to the site which could hinder development. Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. Clearly delineate the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width, SECTION VII. Subsections i and j of the definition of “Preliminary Plat or Binding Site Plan” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.16, Definitions P, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code are hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. i. Location, distances from existing and new lot lines, and dimensions of any existing and proposed structures, existing on‐site trees on and abutting the site, existing or proposed fencing or retaining walls, freestanding signs, and easements. j. Location of existing conditions on or adjacent to the site which could hinder development. Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 218 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 123 Clearly delineate the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width. SECTION VIII. Subsection t of the definition of “Short Plat or Binding Site Plan Map, Final” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. t. Location of existing conditions (such as wetlands, steep slopes, watercourses) on or adjacent to the site which could hinder development. Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. Clearly delineate the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width. SECTION IX. Subsections j and k of the definition of “Short Plat Map, Preliminary” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code are hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. j. Location and dimensions of any existing and proposed structures, existing on‐site trees on and abutting the site, existing or proposed fencing or retaining walls, freestanding signs, and easements; k. Location of existing conditions on or adjacent to the site which could hinder development; Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 219 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 124 Clearly delineate the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width; SECTION X. Subsections f and g of the definition of “Site Plan” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code are hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. f. Location and dimensions of existing and proposed structures, parking and loading areas, driveways, existing on‐site trees on and abutting the site, existing or proposed fencing or retaining walls, freestanding signs, easements, refuse and recycling areas, freestanding liquid fixtures, utility junction boxes, public utility transformers, storage areas, buffer areas, open spaces, and landscaped areas, g. The location and dimensions of natural features such as streams, lakes, marshes and wetlands. Include boundaries of utility, open space, and/or critical area(s) tracts, square footage, and purpose statement of each tract. Clearly delineate the critical area and buffer boundaries within the tract and indicate a dimension for buffer width, SECTION XI. Subsection b of the definition of “Site Plan, Sign” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 220 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 125 b. Location, identification and dimensions of all buildings, property lines, existing and proposed signs, streets, alleys and easements, and the setbacks from property lines and easements, trees to be removed or altered, distance in feet from any critical areas/buffers, SECTION XII. Subsection e of the definition of “Site Plan, Single Family/Duplex” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as shown below. The definition is further amended by adding a new subsection n, as shown below. The rest of the definition shall remain as currently codified. e. Dimensions and labels for all streets, alleys, and/or easements, and critical areas, n. Location of all trees on and abutting the site. Indicate which trees are to be removed and depict drip lines for those trees to be retained. SECTION XIII. The definition of “Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan, Preliminary: The mitigation plan must ensure compensation for impacts that result from the chosen development alternative or from a violation as identified in the impact evaluation. A mitigation plan must include: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 221 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 126 a. Site Map: Site map(s) indicating, at a scale no smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20') (unless otherwise approved by the Community and Economic Development Administrator): i. The entire parcel of land owned by the applicant, including one hundred feet (100') of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); ii. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) determined in the field by a qualified biologist pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1.b (the OHWM must also be flagged in the field); iii. Stream or lake classification, as recorded in the City of Renton Water Class Map as identified in the City of Renton’s COR Maps, the City’s online interactive mapping application available through the City’s website, in RMC 4‐3‐ 050Q4 or RMC 4‐3‐090 (if unclassified, see “Supplemental Stream or Lake Study”); iv. Topography of the site and abutting lands in relation to the stream(s) and its/their buffer(s) at contour intervals of two feet (2') where slopes are less than ten percent (10%), and of five feet (5') where slopes are ten percent (10%) or greater; v. One hundred (100) year floodplain and floodway boundaries, including one hundred feet (100') of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 222 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 127 vi. Site drainage patterns, using arrows to indicate the direction of major drainage flow; vii. Top view and typical cross‐section views of the stream or lake bed, banks, and buffers to scale; viii. The vegetative cover of the entire site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, and/or abutting wetland areas, extending one hundred feet (100') upstream and downstream from the property line. Include position, species, and size of all trees of at least ten inches (10") average diameter six inch (6") caliper and larger, fifty‐four inches (54") above grade, and the location, size and species of all protected trees on the site that are within one hundred feet (100') of the OHWM;, and the location of any measures to protect trees on and abutting the site; ix. The location, width, depth, and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, wastewater treatment and installations in relation to the stream/lake and its/their buffer(s); x. Location of site access, ingress and egress; and xi. Location of where all mitigation or remediation measures have taken place on the site, or are proposed to take place. b. Mitigation narrative on eight and one‐half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper that includes the following elements: i. Description of the mitigation plan, which includes a summary of mitigation proposal required in the supplemental stream or lake study; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 223 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 128 ii. Performance standards with specific criteria provided for evaluating whether or not the goals and objectives of the project are achieved; and iii. Documentation of coordination with appropriate local, regional, special district, state, and federal regulatory agencies; and iv. Evaluation of each of the mitigation plan criteria found in RMC 4‐3‐050.L; and v. Analysis, for projects proposing buffer reduction with buffer averaging, of the effectiveness of the proposed Buffer Enhancement shall be provided. Additionally, a detailed analysis of the project’s compliance with each of the following criteria: (a) It will provide an overall improvement in water quality; and (b) It will provide an overall enhancement to fish, wildlife, or their habitat; and (c) It will provide a net improvement in drainage and/or stormwater detention capabilities; and (d) It will not be materially detrimental to any other property or the City as a whole; and (e) It will stabilize all exposed areas with native vegetation, as appropriate. vi. An analysis, for projects proposing buffer averaging, of the effectiveness of the proposed Buffer Enhancement, as well as documentation 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 224 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 129 that the proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905 shall be provided. Additionally, detailed analysis of the project’s compliance with each of the following criteria: (a) There are existing physical improvements in or near the water body and associated riparian area; and (b) Buffer width averaging will result in no net loss of stream/lake/riparian ecological function; and (c) The total area contained within the buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer width prior to averaging. c. Monitoring and Maintenance Plan: The plan shall be on eight and one‐ half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper that includes the following elements: i. Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the site; and ii. Monitoring and evaluation procedures, including minimum monitoring standards and timelines (i.e., annual, semi‐annual, quarterly); and iii. Contingency plan with remedial actions for unsuccessful mitigation. d. Surety Device: A surety device that must be filed with the City of Renton. SECTION XIV. The definition of “Stream or Lake Study, Standard” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations, of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 225 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 130 Stream or Lake Study, Standard: A report shall be prepared by a qualified biologist, unless otherwise determined by the Community and Economic Development Administrator, and include the following information: a. Site Map: Site map(s) indicating, at a scale no smaller than one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20') (unless otherwise approved by the Community and Economic Development Administrator): i. The entire parcel of land owned by the applicant, including one hundred feet (100') of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); ii. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) determined in the field by a qualified biologist pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1.b (the OHWM must also be flagged in the field); iii. Stream or lake classification, as recorded in the City of Renton’s COR Maps, the City’s online interactive mapping application available through the City’s website, for the City of Renton Water Class Map in RMC 4‐3‐050Q4 or RMC 4‐3‐090 (if unclassified, see “Supplemental Stream or Lake Study” below); iv. Topography of the site and abutting lands in relation to the stream(s) and its/their buffer(s) at contour intervals of two feet (2') where slopes are less than ten percent (10%), and of five feet (5') where slopes are ten percent (10%) or greater; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 226 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 131 v. One hundred (100) year floodplain and floodway boundaries, including one hundred feet (100') of the abutting parcels through which the water body(ies) flow(s); vi. Site drainage patterns, using arrows to indicate the direction of major drainage flow; vii. Top view and typical cross‐section views of the stream or lake bed, banks, and buffers to scale; viii. The vegetative cover of the entire site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, and/or abutting wetland areas, extending one hundred feet (100') upstream and downstream from the property line. Include position, species, and size of all trees of at least ten inches (10") average diameter six inch (6") caliper and larger, fifty four inches (54") above grade, and the location, size and species of all protected trees on the site that are within one hundred feet (100') of the OHWM;, and the location of measures to protect trees on and abutting the site; ix. The location, width, depth, and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, wastewater treatment and installations in relation to the stream/lake and its/their buffer(s); and x. Location of site access, ingress and egress. b. Grading Plan: A grading plan prepared in accordance with RMC 4‐ 8‐120.D.7, and showing contour intervals of two feet (2') where slopes are less 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 227 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 132 than ten percent (10%), and of five feet (5') where slopes are ten percent (10%) or greater. c. Stream or Lake Assessment Narrative: A narrative report on eight and one‐half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper shall be prepared to accompany the site plan and describes: i. The stream or lake classification as recorded in the City of Renton’s COR Maps, the City’s online interactive mapping application available through the City’s website, for the City of Renton Water Class Map in RMC 4‐3‐ 050Q4 or RMC 4‐3‐090; ii. The vegetative cover of the site, including the stream or lake, banks, riparian area, wetland areas, and flood hazard areas extending one hundred feet (100') upstream and downstream from the property line, including the impacts of the proposal on the identified vegetation; iii. The ecological functions currently provided by the stream/lake and existing riparian area and the impacts of the proposal on the identified ecological functions; iv. Observed or reported fish and wildlife that make use of the area including, but not limited to, salmonids, mammals, and bird nesting, breeding, and feeding/foraging areas, including the impacts of the proposal on the identified fish and wildlife; v. Measures to protect trees, as defined per in RMC 4‐11‐200, and vegetation; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 228 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 133 vi. For shorelines regulated under RMC 4‐3‐090, Shoreline Master Program, the study shall demonstrate if the proposal meets the criteria of no net loss of ecological functions as described in RMC 4‐3‐090D2. If the proposal requires mitigation for substantial impacts to the existing vegetation buffer in order to demonstrate no net loss of ecological functions, a supplemental stream or lake study may be is required by the Community and Economic Development Administrator. SECTION XV. The definition of “Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.19, Definitions S, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: Stream or Lake Study, Supplemental (AKA Mitigation Plan, Final): The application shall include the following information: a. Unclassified Stream Assessment: If the site contains an unclassified stream, a qualified biologist shall provide a proposed classification of the stream(s) based on RMC 4‐3‐050.L.1 and a rationale for the proposed rating. b. Analysis of Alternatives: A supplemental report on eight and one‐ half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper prepared by a qualified biologist shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property. The following alternatives shall be analyzed, including justification of the feasibility of each alternative: i. Avoid any disturbances to the stream, lake or buffer by not taking a certain action, by not taking parts of an action, or by moving the action; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 229 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 134 ii. Minimize any stream, lake or buffer impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation by using appropriate technology and engineering, or by taking affirmative steps to avoid or reduce the impacts; iii. Rectifying the impacts by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected area; iv. Reducing or eliminating the adverse impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations over the life of the action; v. Compensate for any stream, lake or buffer impacts by replacing, enhancing, or providing similar substitute resources or environments and monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. c. Impact Evaluation: i. An impact evaluation for any unavoidable impacts prepared by a qualified biologist, to include: (a) Identification, by characteristics and quantity, of the resources (stream, lake) and corresponding functional values found on the site; (b) Evaluation of alternative locations, design modifications, or alternative methods of development to determine which option(s) reduce(s) the impacts on the identified resource(s) and functional values of the site; (c) Determination of the alternative that best meets the applicable approval criteria and identify significant detrimental impacts that are unavoidable; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 230 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 135 (d) Evaluation of the cumulative impacts on the system, to the extent that the site resources and functional values are part of a larger natural system such as a watershed . (e) Evaluation, for shorelines regulated by RMC 4‐3‐090, of how the preferred alternative achieves the standard of no net loss of ecological functions under RMC 4‐3‐090.D.2.; (f) Evaluation of each of the mitigation plan criteria found in RMC 4‐3‐050.K.1, Mitigation plan required. ii. For a violation, the impact evaluation must also include: (a) Description, by characteristics and quantity, of the resource(s) and functional values on the site prior to the violations; and (b) Determination of the impact of the violation on the resource(s) and functional values. d. Mitigation Proposal Shall Include the Following: i. A site plan, at a scale approved by the City, containing all the elements of the site plan required in the standard stream and lake study, and the following: (a) Indication of where proposed mitigation or remediation measures will take place on the site; (b) Separate indication of areas where revegetation is to take place and areas where vegetation is anticipated to be removed; and (c) Measures to protect trees on and abutting the site; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 231 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 136 (cd) Any other areas of impact with clear indication of type and extent of impact indicated on site plan. ii. A mitigation narrative on eight and one‐half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper addressing all of the following: (a) Resource(s) and functional values to be restored, created, or enhanced on the mitigation site(s); (b) Environmental goals, objectives, and performance standards to be achieved by mitigation; (c) Discussion of compliance with criteria or conditions allowing for the proposed stream/lake alteration or buffer reduction or buffer averaging, and a discussion of conformity to applicable mitigation plan approval criteria; (d) A review of the best available science supporting the proposed request for a reduced standard and/or the method of impact mitigation; a description of the report author’s experience to date in restoring or creating the type of critical area proposed; and an analysis of the likelihood of success of the compensation project; and (e) Cost estimates for implementation of mitigation plan for purposes of calculating surety device. iii. For shorelines regulated by RMC 4‐3‐090, a discussion of how the proposed plans meet or exceed the standard of no net loss of ecological functions under RMC 4‐3‐090.D.2; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 232 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 137 iv. The proposed construction schedule. e. Monitoring and Maintenance Plan: The plan shall be on eight and one‐half inch (8.5") by eleven inch (11") paper that includes the following elements: i. Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the site; and ii. Monitoring and evaluation procedures, including minimum monitoring standards, measurable success criteria, and timelines (i.e., annual, semi‐annual, quarterly); and iii. Contingency plan with remedial actions for unsuccessful mitigation. f. Surety Device: A surety device in one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of remedial actions if the mitigation plan is unsuccessful must be filed with the City of Renton. g. Permit Conditions: Any compensation project prepared for mitigation pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050 and approved by the City shall become part of the application for project approval. h. Demonstration of Competence: A demonstration of financial resources, administrative, supervisory, and technical competence and scientific expertise of sufficient standing to successfully execute the compensation project shall be provided. A compensation project manager shall be named and the qualifications of each team member involved in preparing the mitigation plan 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 233 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 138 and implementing and supervising the project shall be provided, including educational background and areas of expertise, training and experience with comparable projects. SECTION XVI. The definition of “Wetland Assessment” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.23, Definitions W, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: Wetland Assessment: A wetland assessment includes the following: a. A description of the project and maps at a scale no smaller than one inch equals two hundred feet (1" = 200') showing the entire parcel of land owned by the applicant and the wetland boundary surveyed by a qualified surveyor, and pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050.M.3; b. A description of the vegetative cover of the wetland and adjacent area including identification of the dominant plant and animal species; c. A site plan for the proposed activity at a scale no smaller than one inch equals two hundred feet (1" = 200') showing the location, width, depth and length of all existing and proposed structures, roads, stormwater management facilities, sewage treatment and installations within the wetland and its buffer; d. The exact locations and specifications for all activities associated with site development including the type, extent and method of operations; e. Elevations of the site and adjacent lands within the wetland and its buffer at contour intervals of no greater than five feet (5') or at a contour interval appropriate to the site topography and acceptable to the City; 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 234 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 139 f. Top view and typical cross‐section views of the wetland and its buffer to scale; g. The purposes of the project. and, if a wetland alteration or a buffer reduction or averaging proposal is being requested, an explanation of how applicable review criteria are met; h. If wetland mitigation is proposed, a mitigation plan which includes baseline information, an identification of direct and indirect impacts of the project to the wetland area and wetland functions, environmental goals and objectives, performance standards, construction plans, a monitoring program and a contingency plan. i. Alternative Methods of Development: If wetland changes are proposed, the applicant shall evaluate alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: • Avoid any disturbances to the wetland or buffer; • Minimize any wetland or buffer impacts; • Compensate for any wetland or buffer impacts; • Restore any wetlands or buffer impacted or lost temporarily; • Create new wetlands and buffers for those lost; and • In addition to restoring a wetland or creating a wetland, enhance an existing degraded wetland to compensate for lost functions and values. This evaluation shall be submitted to the Department Administrator. Any proposed alteration of wetlands shall be evaluated by the Department Administrator using the above hierarchy. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 235 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 140 jh. Such other information as may be needed by the City, including but not limited to a study of hazards if present on site, the effect of any protective measures that might be taken to reduce such hazards; and any other information deemed necessary to verify compliance with the provisions of this Ssection. SECTION XVII. Subsection e, Monitoring Program, of the definition of “Wetland Mitigation Plan – Final” in subsection 4‐8‐120.D.23, Definitions W, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: e. Monitoring and Maintenance Plan and Program: A program outlining the approach for monitoring construction and development of the compensation project and for assessing a completed project shall be provided in the mitigation plan. i. The plan shall be on eight and one‐half inch (8.5”) by eleven inch (11”) paper that includes the following elements: (a) Operations and maintenance practices for protection and maintenance of the site; and (b) Monitoring and evaluation procedures, including minimum monitoring standards, measurable success criteria, and timelines (i.e., annual, semi‐annual, quarterly); and (c) Contingency plan with remedial actions for unsuccessful mitigation. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 236 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 141 ii. Monitoring may include, but is not limited to: i. (a) Establishing vegetation plots to track changes in plant species composition and density over time; ii. (b) Using photo stations to evaluate vegetation community response; iii. (c) Sampling surface and subsurface waters to determine pollutant loading, and changes from the natural variability of background conditions (pH, nutrients, heavy metals); iv. (d) Measuring base flow rates and storm water runoff to model and evaluate hydrologic and water quality predictions; v. (e) Measuring sedimentation rates; vi. (f) Sampling fish and wildlife populations to determine habitat utilization, species abundance and diversity; and vii. (g) A description shall be included outlining how the monitoring data will be evaluated by agencies that are tracking the progress of the compensation project. A monitoring report shall be submitted quarterly for the first year and annually thereafter, and at a minimum, should document milestones, successes, problems, and contingency actions of the compensation project. The compensation project shall be monitored for a period necessary to establish that performance standards have been met, but not for a period less than five (5) years. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 237 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 142 SECTION XVIII. The definition of “Wetland Mitigation Plan – Final” in subsection 4‐8‐ 120.D.23, Definitions W, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended to add a new subsection i, Surety Device, to read as follows: i. Surety Device: A surety device in one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the estimated cost of remedial actions if the mitigation plan is unsuccessful must be filed with the City of Renton. SECTION XIX. The definition of “Wetland Mitigation Plan – Preliminary” in subsection 4‐ 8‐120.D.23, Definitions W, of Chapter 8, Permits – General and Appeals, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: Wetland Mitigation Plan – Preliminary: A preliminary wetland mitigation plan shall include the following: a. A conceptual site plan demonstrating sufficient area for replacement ratios; b. Proposed planting scheme for created, restored, and enhanced wetlands; c. Written report consistent with final wetland mitigation plan requirements regarding baseline information, environmental goals and objectives, and performance standards. on eight and one‐half inch (8.5”) by eleven inch (11”) paper: i. identifying direct and indirect impacts of the project to the wetland area and wetland functions, environmental goals and objectives, and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 238 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 143 performance standards, and evaluating alternative methods of developing the property using the following criteria in this order: (a) Avoiding any disturbances to the wetland or buffer; (b) Minimizing any wetland or buffer impacts; (c) Compensating for any wetland or buffer impacts; (d) Restoring any wetlands or buffer impacted or lost temporarily; (e) Creating new wetlands and buffers for those lost; and (f) Enhancing an existing degraded wetland to compensate for lost functions and values, in addition to restoring a wetland or creating a wetland. ii. Evaluating each of the mitigation plan criteria found in RMC 4‐ 3‐050.L. iii For projects proposing a reduction in wetland buffer width with enhancement, providing a detailed analysis of the project’s compliance with each of the following criteria: (a) The reduced buffer will function at a higher level than the standard buffer in compliance with subsections (ii) through (v) of this Section, and (b) An enhanced buffer shall never be less than 75% of the standard width at its narrowest point, and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 239 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 144 (c) The buffer area has less than fifteen percent (15%) slopes and no direct or indirect, short‐term or long‐term, adverse impacts to regulated wetlands, as determined by the City, will result from a regulated activity, and (d) The proposal shall rely upon a site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science (Ecology Publication #05‐06‐006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #04‐06‐008, April 2005)., or similar approaches, and (e) The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; iv. And, for projects proposing averaging in wetland buffer width with enhancement, providing a detailed analysis of the project’s compliance with each of the following criteria: (a) There are existing physical improvements in or near the wetland and buffer; and (b) That width averaging will not adversely impact the wetland function and values; and (c) That the total area contained within the wetland buffer after averaging is no less than that contained within the required standard buffer prior to averaging; and 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 240 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 145 (d) A site specific evaluation and documentation of buffer adequacy based upon Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 1: A Synthesis of the Science (Ecology Publication #05‐06‐006, March 2005) and Wetlands in Washington State, Volume 2: Managing and Protecting Wetlands (Ecology Publication #04‐06‐008, April 2005), or similar approaches have been conducted. The proposed buffer standard is based on consideration of the best available science as described in WAC 365‐195‐905; and (e) In no instance shall the buffer width be reduced by more than seventy‐five percent (75%) of the standard buffer. Greater buffer width reductions require review as a variance pursuant to RMC 4‐9‐250.B; and (f) And analysis of the effectiveness of the proposed Buffer Enhancement. SECTION XX. Subsection 4‐9‐250.B.1.c, Proposals Located Within Critical Areas, of Chapter 9, Permits Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: c. Proposals Located Within Critical Areas: i. Aquifer Wellhead Protection Areas: If an applicant feels that the strict application of aquifer protection regulations would deny all reasonable use of the property or would deny installation of public transportation or utility facilities determined by the public agency proposing these facilities to be in the best interest of the public health, safety and welfare, the applicant of a development proposal may apply for a variance. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 241 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 146 ii. Flood Hazards: Variances from the flood hazard requirements of RMC 4‐3‐050, Critical Areas Regulations. iii. Steep Slopes Forty Percent (40%) or Greater and Very High Landslide Hazards: Variances from the geologic hazard requirements of RMC 4‐ 3‐050, Critical Areas Regulations. iv. Wetlands: (a) Creation/restoration/enhancement ratios: Categories 1 Iand 2 II. (b) Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4‐3‐050M6e and M6f for Category 3 IV. (c) A new or expanded single family residence on an existing, legal lot, having a regulated Category 3 IV wetland. (d) Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4‐3‐050M6e and M6f for Category 1I or 2II. v. Streams and Lakes: (a) A new or expanded single family residence on a pre‐ existing platted lot where there is not enough developable area elsewhere on the site to accommodate building pads and provide practical off‐street parking, providing reasonable use of the property. (b) Buffer width reductions not otherwise authorized by RMC 4‐3‐050L, Streams and Lakes for Class 2 to 4Types F, Np, and Ns. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 242 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 147 (c) Activities proposing to vary from stream regulations not listed elsewhere in subsection RMC 4‐9‐250.B.1.a of this Section, and authorized to be requested as variances in RMC 4‐3‐050L. vi. General: Public/quasi‐public utility or agency proposing to alter aquifer wellhead protection, geologic hazard, habitat or wetlands regulations not listed above. SECTION XXI. The first sentence of subsection 4‐9‐250.B.7, Special Review Criteria for Variances from the Aquifer Protection Regulations, of Chapter 9, Permits Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as shown below. Subsections 4‐9‐250.B.1.7.a – d shall remain as currently codified. 7. Special Review Criteria for Variances from the Aquifer Wellhead Protection Regulations: Except for public or quasi‐public utility or agency proposals which are subject to subsection RMC 4‐9‐250.B.10 of this Section, the following criteria shall be considered, in addition to those criteria in subsections RMC 4‐9‐250.B.5 and B.6 of this Section, for variances from aquifer protection regulations: SECTION XXII. The first sentence of subsection 4‐9‐250.B.9, Special Review Criteria – Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Category 3 Wetland; or Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Class 2, 3, or 4 Stream/Lake, of Chapter 9, Permits Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as shown below. Subsections 4‐9‐250.B.1.9.a – h shall remain as currently codified. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 243 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 148 9. Special Review Criteria – Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Category 3 IV Wetland; or Single Family Residence on a Legal Lot with a Class 2, 3, or 4 Type F, Np, or Ns Stream/Lake: In lieu of the criteria shown in subsection RMC 4‐9‐250.B.10 of this Section, a variance may be granted from any wetland or stream requirement in the critical areas regulations for a single family residence to be located on an existing legal lot if all of the following criteria are met: SECTION XXIII. The first sentence of subsection 4‐9‐250.B.10, Special Review Criteria – Public/Quasi‐Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, Steam/Lake or Wetland Regulations, of Chapter 9, Permits Specific, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as shown below. Subsections 4‐ 9‐250.B.1.10.a – j shall remain as currently codified. 10. Special Review Criteria – Public/Quasi‐Public Utility or Agency Altering Aquifer Wellhead Protection, Geologic Hazard, Habitat, Stream/Lake or Wetland Regulations: In lieu of the variance criteria of subsection RMC 4‐9‐ 250.B.5 of this Section, applications by public/quasi‐public utilities or agencies proposing to alter aquifer protection, geologic hazard, habitat, stream and lake or wetland regulations shall be reviewed for compliance with all of the following criteria: SECTION XXIV. The definition of “Department” in section 4‐11‐040, Definitions D, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 244 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 149 DEPARTMENT: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department of Community and Economic Development of the City of Renton, unless otherwise specified. SECTION XXV. The definition of “Stream/Lake Class” in section 4‐11‐190, Definitions S, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby amended as follows: STREAM/LAKE CLASS: The stream and lake waters in the City are defined by class as follows: indicated in RMC 4‐3‐050. 1. Class 1: Class 1 waters are perennial salmonid‐bearing waters which are classified by the City and State as Shorelines of the State. 2. Class 2: Class 2 waters are perennial or intermittent salmonid‐bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: a. Mapped on Figure 4‐3‐050Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 2; and/or b. Historically and/or currently known to support salmonids, including resident trout, at any stage in the species lifecycle; and/or c. Is a water body (e.g., pond, lake) between one‐half (0.5) acre and twenty (20) acres in size. 3. Class 3: Class 3 waters are non‐salmonid‐bearing perennial waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure 4‐3‐050Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 3. 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 245 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 150 4. Class 4: Class 4 waters are non‐salmonid‐bearing intermittent waters during years of normal rainfall, and/or mapped on Figure 4‐3‐050Q4, Renton Water Class Map, as Class 4. 5. Class 5: Class 5 waters are non‐regulated non‐salmonid‐bearing waters which meet one or more of the following criteria: a. Flow within an artificially constructed channel where no naturally defined channel had previously existed; and/or b. Are a surficially isolated water body less than one‐half (0.5) acre (e.g., pond) not meeting the criteria for a wetland as defined in RMC 4‐3‐050M. SECTION XXVI. The definition of “Wetland” in section 4‐11‐230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, is hereby repealed. SECTION XXVII. The definitions of “Wetland Edge”, “Wetland, Regulated”, and “Wetlands” in section 4‐11‐230, Definitions W, of Chapter 11, Definitions, of Title IV (Development Regulations) of the Renton Municipal Code, are hereby amended as follows: WETLAND EDGE: The boundary of a wetland as delineated using the Washington State Wetlands Identification and Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual pursuant to RMC 4‐3‐050M4a. WETLAND, REGULATED: See RMC 4‐3‐050M1e. WETLANDS: (This definition for RMC 4‐3‐090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) Areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 246 of 247 ORDINANCE NO. ________ 151 normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass‐lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands include artificial wetlands created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands. SECTION XXVIII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and thirty (30) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this _______ day of ___________________, 2015. Jason A. Seth, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this _______ day of _____________________, 2015. Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney Date of Publication: ORD:1863:5/8/15:scr 7a. - Critical Areas Regulations (1st reading 5/18/2015)Page 247 of 247