Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
ORD 5612
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 5612 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE SUNSET AREA PLANNED ACTION. WHEREAS, the Council has heretofore adopted and filed a Comprehensive Plan and has implemented and amended the Comprehensive Plan from time to time, together with the adoption of various codes, reports and records; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has heretofore fully recommended to the Council, from time to time, certain amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130 allows the Comprehensive Plan to be updated only once a year except under certain circumstances, one of those circumstances being the adoption of amendments necessary to implement a Planned Action ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City is simultaneously adopting the Sunset Area Planned Action ordinance; and WHEREAS, the City has held a public hearing on this matter on April 6, 2011; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has made certain findings and recommendations to the Council; and WHEREAS, the Council has duly determined after due consideration of the evidence before it that it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the City's Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, such modification and elements for the Comprehensive Plan being in the best interest for the public benefit; 1 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I. The above findings and recitals are found to be true and correct in all respects. SECTION II. The following Comprehensive Plan elements are hereby modified, amended and adopted in part: Capital Facilities, Transportation, and Utilities, as shown on Attachments A, B, and C, respectively, and incorporated herein as if fully set forth. SECTION III. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five (5) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 13th day of June , 2011. Bonnie I. Walton, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 13th day of June 2011. Denis Law, Mayor Approved as to form: * Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney / Or -' ORD.1706:4/12/ll:scr Date of Publication: 6/17/2011 (summary) 2 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 ATTACHMENT A AMENDMENTS TO CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 2007-2012 GOAL Develop and implement the capital facilities plan for the City of Renton. m-i Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Purpose The purpose of the Capital Facilities Plan is: • to identify the new or expanded public facilities that will be needed to accommodate —at an established level of service—the growth projected to occur within the City of Renton in the first six years of the Comprehensive Plan; and • to identify the sources of public financing for these public facilities. Methods and Process The Capital Facilities Plan relies heavily on the analyses and policies presented in the other seven elements of the Comprehensive Plan as well as in the Fire Department Master Plan, Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan, Long Range Wastewater Management Plan, Issaquah, Kent and Renton School District's Capital Improvement Plans, and City of Renton Annual Capital Improvements Plan. For detailed information and explanations concerning growth projections, land use determinations, existing facilities, level of service, etc., the reader must consult these documents. The Capital Facilities Plan incorporates by reference the information and analyses presented in these other documents and the annual updates to these plans concerning existing facilities and level of service standards. Based on these other documents, the Capital Facilities Plan establishes policies for determining which public facilities should be built and how they should be paid for, and presents a six-year plan for the use of public funds toward building and funding the needed capital facilities. The process for arriving at the six-year plan involved identifying existing facilities and level of service standards and then applying the projected growth in residential population and employment to identify the needed capital facilities. The timing of the facilities was established through a combination of the requirements of the city's concurrency policy and the length of time it takes to implement the needed facility. Type and Providers of Capital Facilities For the purposes of complying with the requirements of the GMA, the Capital Facilities Plan proposes a six-year plan for the following capital facilities and providers: transportation domestic water sanitary sewer surface water parks facilities fire police economic development City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton m-2 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT REQUIREMENTS Passed by the legislature in 1990, the Growth Management Act establishes planning goals as well as specific content requirements to guide local jurisdictions in the development and adoption of comprehensive plans. One of the thirteen planning goals stated in the Act is to: Ensure that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development is available for occupancy and use without decreasing current service levels below locally established minimum standards. (RCW 36.70A.02Q(12)) To this end, the Act requires that each comprehensive plan contains: A capital facilities plan element consisting of: (a) An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities; (b) a forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities; (c) the proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities; (d) at least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes; and (e) a requirement to reassess the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs and to ensure that the land use element, capital facilities plan element, and financing plan within the capital facilities plan element are coordinated and consistent. (RCW 36.70A.070(3)) With respect to transportation facilities, the Act is more specific, requiring that: ...transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development and defining "concurrent with development" to mean "that improvements or strategies are in place at the time of development, or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvements or strategies within six years." (RCW 36.70A.070(6)) The Act also requires that: ...cities shall perform their activities and make capital budget decisions in conformity with their comprehensive plans. (RCW 36.70A.120) Administrative Regulations (WAC 365-195) In support of the GMA legislation, state administrative regulations require that the Capital Facilities Plan consist of at least the following features (WAC 365-195-315(1)): 1. An inventory of existing capital facilities owned by public entities, showing the locations and capacities of the capital facilities. 2. A forecast of the future needs for such capital facilities. 3. The proposed locations and capacities of expanded or new capital facilities. 4. At least a six-year plan that will finance such capital facilities within projected funding capacities and clearly identifies sources of public money for such purposes. m-3 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 5. A reassessment of the land use element if probable funding falls short of meeting existing needs. In the administrative regulations, the state recommends that in addition to transportation, concurrency should be sought for domestic water and sanitary sewer systems. (WAC 365-195- 060(3)) Additionally, the regulations state that the planning for all elements, including the Capital Facilities Plan, should be undertaken with the goal of economic development in mind even though the Act does not mandate an economic development element for the plan. (WAC 365- 195-060(2)) GROWTH PROJECTIONS The Puget Sound Regional Council population and employment forecast growth for the City over the twenty-one-year interval from 2001 to 2022 is an increase of 9,723 households, and 33,600 jobs. Growth targets adopted by the Growth Management Planning Council anticipate 6,198 households and 27,597 jobs. Both forecast growth and targets are well within the City's estimated land capacity of 11,261 units and 32,240 jobs established through the Buildable Lands requirements of the Growth Management Act (GMA). Renton is planning for its regional share of forecast growth over the next 20 years at the high end of the range, and the adopted target at the low end of the range. In the first 9 years of growth management actual growth in Renton exceeded targets, but was within the range predicted by the forecast growth assumptions. With external factors, including the regional economy, state/federal transportation funding and the GMA regulatory environment remaining constant or improving, Renton's growth is anticipated to continue over the next 6 year planning cycle. The following chart summarizes Renton's forecast growth, targets and land use capacity. City of Renton Adjustment Reflecting Growth, Annexation, and Land Use Changes up to 2006 Estimated Growth Per Year (for the 16 years remaining in the target) 2007-2012 Capital Facilities Plan Estimates For City of Renton Forecast Growth 2001-2022 9,723 units 33,600 jobs 22,266 population None 463 units 1,600 jobs (21 yrs) 2,778 units 9,600 jobs Growth Targets 2022 6,198 units 27,597 jobs 14,194 population 2,257 units 24,797jobs . 141 units 1,505 jobs 846 units 9300 jobs Capacity established by- Buildable Lands 2006-2022 11,261 units 32,240 jobs 25,788 population 12,192 units 28,589 jobs NA NA m-4 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 For the purpose of developing a six-year capital facilities plan for the period from 2007 through 2012, an estimate was made as to the amount of the remaining 21-year growth to be realized during the six-year Capital Facilities Element planning cycle. After reviewing the projections and the underlying assumptions, it was determined that for planning purposes, the most prudent course was to assume a uniform allocation of the forecast growth and targets over the 21-year period, rather than trying to predict year by year economic cycles. Renton's growth over the first years of growth management is occurring more rapidly than originally forecast. The estimate for 2001 was 48,456 persons however the actual population by April 1, 2001 was 51,140, exceeding forecast growth by 2,684 persons housed in 1,177 housing units over a 6 year period (196 units per year). By April 1, 2004, the City population was 55,360, representing an increase of another 4,220 residents and an estimated 1, 850 units. The number of units realized between 2002 and 2004 exceeds the forecast projection of 1,389 units by 461 units (153 units per year). Some of this development can be explained by new housing developed in areas annexing to the City. However, the increase exceeds the proportional share of housing target and forecast growth assigned to this annexation area and assumed by the City upon annexation. For the purposes of the next phase of the planning cycle, the 2007 to 2012 six-year Capital Facilities Plan, Renton will continue plan for the next six-year increment of forecast growth assuming an increase of 2,778 units and 9,600 jobs. Forecast growth represents the upper end of expected growth, while the target of 846 units and 9,300 jobs represented the minimum amount of growth expected for this period. The City's population in the year 2012 is forecast as 61,694 persons. To be sure, growth will not occur precisely as projected over the next six-year or the 21-year period. Recognizing this fact, the Capital Facilities Plan should be updated at least biennially. In this way local governments have the opportunity to re-evaluate their forecasts in light of the actual growth experienced, revise their forecasts for the next six years if necessary, and adjust the number and.timing of capital facilities that would be needed during the ensuing six-year period. The City performed such a review of the Capital Facilities Plan in 2004 and determined that there was not a need to adjust the growth forecast or the number and timing of capital facilities. This conclusion was based on a finding that although actual growth was higher than forecast, the level of service standards were being maintained. Subsequent reviews may result in revisions to the growth projections and the number and timing of capital facilities if actual growth continues to exceed the forecast growth As stated in Policy CFP-1, this Capital Facilities Plan is anticipated to be updated regularly as part of the city's budget process, thereby ensuring that the Plan reflects the most current actual statistics related to growth in Renton, and that capital facilities are slated for implementation in accordance with both the level of service standards and the city's concurrency policy. It is anticipated that the City will fully implement this policy (CFP-1) in the annual budget process. m-5 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN POLICIES Policy CFP-1. The Capital Facilities Plan should be updated on a regular basis as part of the city's budget process, and such update may include adjustments to growth projections for the ensuing six years, to level of service standards, to the list of needed facilities, or to anticipated funding sources. For the purpose of capital facilities planning, plan for forecast growth at the high end of the projected range and targeted growth as a minimum. Policy CFP-2. Level of service standards should be maintained at the current or at a greater level of service for existing facilities within the City of Renton, which the City has control over. Policy CFP-3. Adequate public capital facilities should be in place concurrent with development. Concurrent with development shall mean the existence of adequate facilities, strategies, or services when development occurs or the existence of a financial commitment to provide adequate facilities, strategies, or services within six years of when development occurs. Policy CFP-4. No deterioration of existing levels of service that the City of Renton has control over should occur due to growth, consistent with Policy CFP-3. Policy CFP-5. Funding for new, improved, or expanded public facilities or services should come from a mix of sources in order to distribute the cost of such facilities or services according to use, need, and adopted goals and policies. Policy CFP-6. Evaluate levying impact fees on development for municipal services and/or school district services upon the request of each school district within the City limits, if a compelling need is established through means such as presentation of an adopted Capital Facilities Plan and demonstration that such facilities are needed to accommodate projected growth and equitably distributed throughout the district. Policy CFP-7. Adopt by reference the most current Kent School District #415 Capital Facilities Plan and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact fee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan. Policy CFP-8. Adopt by reference the most current Issaquah School District #411 Capital Facilities Plan and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact fee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan. Policy CFP-9. Adopt by reference the most current Renton School District #403 Capital Facilities Plan and adopt an implementing ordinance establishing a school impact fee consistent with the District's adopted Capital Facilities Plan. Policy CFP-10. Support private/public partnerships to plan and finance infrastructure development, public uses, structured parking and community amenities to stimulate additional private investment and produce a more urban environment. (See the Public Facilities and Annexation Sections of the Land Use Element, the Parks, Recreation Trails and Open Space Element, the Utilities Element, and the Transportation Elements for policies related to this Capital Facilities Plan.) m-6 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2008-2013 Inventory of Existing Facilities Figures 7-1, 7-2, and 7-3 on the following pages indicate the degree to which Renton's transportation system is integrally linked to the regional transportation system. The first exhibit is of the existing street and highway system; the second depicts traffic flows on that system in 2002; and, the third depicts daily traffic volumes forecasted for 2022. In Renton perhaps more than in any other jurisdiction in the Puget Sound area, actions relating to the transportation system have local and regional implications. Level of Service Background In recognition of the regional nature of the traffic problems faced by Renton and the basic impossibility of building enough roadway capacity to alleviate traffic congestion, the City of Renton has adopted a LOS policy in that emphasizes the movement of people, not just vehicles. The LOS policy is based on three premises: • Level of Service (LOS) in Renton is primarily controlled by regional travel demands that must be solved by regional policies and plans; • It is neither economically nor environmentally sound to try to accommodate all desired . single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel; and • The decision-makers for the region must provide alternatives to SOV travel. m-7 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 7-1 Existing Street/Highway System m-8 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Figure 7-2 Traffic Flow Map m-9 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 7-3 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes m-io Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The LOS policy is based on travel time contours which in turn are based on auto, transit, HOV, non-motorized, and transportation demand management/commute trip reduction measures. The LOS policy is designed to achieve several objectives: • Allow reasonable development to occur; • Encourage a regionally linked, locally oriented, dynamic transportation system; • Meet requirements of the Growth Management Act; • Meet the requirements of the Countywide Planning Policies Level of Service Framework Policies; • Require developers to pay a fair share of transportation costs; and • Provide flexibility for Renton to adjust its LOS policy if the region decides to lower regional LOS standards by not providing regional facilities. The City of Renton LOS standard is used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV, and transit measures are based on travel times and distance and are the primary indicators for concurrency. The non-motorized and TDM measures assist in meeting multi- modal goals of Renton and the region. The Level of Service Standard Methodology The following table demonstrates how the LOS policy is applied. A 2002 LOS travel time index has been calculated for the City by establishing the sum of the average 30-minute travel distance for SOV, HOV and Transit as follows: Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV HOV 2 Transit (includes access time) LOS Standard XX miles XX miles 2 times X miles = XX XX Citywide Level of Service Standard (Years 2002 and 2022) The 2002 LOS index is the basis for the 2022 standard. The average SOV 30-minute travel distance is forecast to decrease by 2022. Therefore, SOV improvements will need to be implemented to raise the SOV equivalent or a combination of HOV and/or transit improvements will need to be implemented to raise the HOV and/or transit equivalents to maintain the LOS standard. Renton's Transportation Improvement Plan Arterial, HOV, and Transit Sub-Elements have been tested against the above LOS standard to assure that the Plan meets the year 2022 standard. m-ll Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Citywide Level of Service Index (Year2002): Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV HOV 2 Transit (includes access time) LOS Index 16.6 miles 18.7 miles 6.8 miles 42* *Rounded NOTE: A LOS index of 42 has been determined for the year 2002 by the new calibrated (2002-2022) transportation model that reflects 2002 and 2022 land use data. The 2002 LOS index of 42 is shown above, and is the basis for the 2022 LOS standard. City-wide Level of Service Standard (Year 2022): Average PM Deak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOV HOV 2 Transit (includes access time) LOS Standard 15 miles 17 miles 10 miles 42 The City of Renton LOS standard is used to evaluate citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV, and transit measures are based on travel times and distance and are the primary indicators for concurrency. The non-motorized and TDM measures serve as credit toward meeting multi- modal goals of Renton and the region. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2008-2013 The transportation 6-year facilities plan is based on achieving the desired level of service by the year 2022 through an annual program of consistent and necessary improvements and strategies. Additionally, the plan includes projects such as bridge inspections, street overlay programs, traffic signal maintenance, and safety improvements that are needed as part of the City's annual work program. Projects that promote economic development also are included, as encouraged by the GMA. See Figure 7-4 on the following page for the latest adopted 6-year plan. The first step in developing the 6-year funding plan was to establish a 20-year plan that included arterial, HOV and transit components. This effort resulted in a planning level cost estimate of $134 million. The cost for arterials and HOV are total costs (or Renton's share of the cost of joint projects with WSDOT and local jurisdictions). The transit costs include only the local match for local feeder system improvements, park and ride lots, signal priority and transit amenities. Having established a 20-year funding level of $134 million, an annual funding level of $6.7 million was established. With this funding level, it is reasonably certain that the desired level of service will be maintained over the intervening years as long as the facilities funded each year are consistent with the 20-year plan and transit and HOV facilities are conscientiously emphasized. The funding source projections in Figure 7.5 are based upon the assumption that: gas tax revenue would continue at no less than $0.35 million per year; that grant funding would be m-12 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 maintained at $3.90 million per year; business license fees would continue at $1.88 million per year based on the current 85% of the annual revenue generated from this fee that is dedicated to fund transportation improvements; and that $0.57 million per year from mitigation fees would be maintained. Based on forecasts of total new vehicle trips from development, a mitigation fee of $75 per trip has been established. Developers are required to implement site-specific improvements to ensure that on-site and adjacent facility impacts are mitigated, as well as paying their required fees. m-i3 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 7-4 2008-2013 Six-Year TIP Total Project Costs CITY OF REMTbN PUNNING / BUILDING .' PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS.DiyjSJQN 2O03-2013' SK,YEAR Tip Total Project Costs T*P Project Tftk •Costa Site? 2005 '2613 '2012' 2313* Period ToUJ Total Cost . * Street. DvcrSaj • 1,2-50.604. £55.000 £55,030 6S5.000 ess,SOD 685;;ooo • S8S.O00 4.110,000 5,350,604 • 5 Arterial Rehab PT&QZ&IT, ' J35.DC0 470,000 - 31.0.000 a «,000 635,000 220,000 2.2O,G00 ' 2,120,000 2.555.G0D *> Duval! Ave KE ' 4.657,35S 2,14S.24u t,.«2.B26 3.SB2.0S6 £.265,425 -t Db-VBii Ave. 'M£ - King CcUnty 2,5^.104 3.533.475 3.523.4?5 6,0S7,57S 5 Duv*H Ave N'E - NE 7tH Si to Stin^st £ '5,000 $15,000 2,750,000 itsso,aoo 5,250,000 530.000 -5" SR 185 HOV , 140th to SRSDC 6,350.4$! 2.55G.G0G 1.054,50d 10,474,SSI 7 Rainier Ave - Grady Way ID S 2nd St 7,933,391 J 0,200,000 5.S0O..0OC 3,700,000 • ,3oo,coa 22.000.00C 2S,S9S.331 S.W 27th Si/Strandcr By Connect 9.32.5,04a a,-(26,000 B,210,000 5.C9S.S0D •,.£26.SC-: 5,082,300 20.560,200 45,402.5001 54,72S,64S NE *th St'KcKjuia.rn Av NE 33,4.53 32,455 400.02D •fe-Ripley Lane 200,000 •447,020 447.00D 647.003 ll Garden Ave N Wvcferiin.Q £-00,000 500,000 500,000 1.000,000 1,500,000 M*y CrtMsk'Erkig* Replacement 20.000 .550.00C ISO ,000 . S.0CQ 735,000 920.SO9 1? |Montert*y / N-£ 2fcth St Watt R*p 30,000 30,009 3-0,000 •U iBric^g* Inspection 8, Repair 1.35,27 3 100.000 330.000 $0,009 ' £5,000 50,000 50.000 635.000 773,273 16 JlrrS«rs.*c*fon Safety 4. MatwtHy 250,000 400,030 2SG.000 250.0G0 250.000 250.000 250.000 1,550.000 1,500,000 16 {Traffic Safety Prcgrsrn 131.653 .2Q,QGD 20,000 40,000 40.000 40.000 40,000 . . 290JQ0O 331 ,SS3 IT fSchooi -Zone Sign Upgra.tlts 200.103 •too.soo 100,000 300,103 is (RR Crossing Safety Prog, 5.4S9 S.DOO S.DSO 10,000 20.000 25.-495 tUtop Replacement Program 3D, DOS 20,000 25,000 30.000 30.000 30,000 30,000 55,000 155,030 2S Sign Replacement Program S.0DS 5.000 7.500 7,500 7,500 40,Q'00| 43.S53 11 Pol* Program 39.626 20.000 2-0,000 25.000 25.0OD 25.000 25,000 140,D00 179.E2S 21 Traffic E"ici*ncy proprsm 156.113 50.000 50.000; . 60.000 30.003 30,000 :20,C-00 240,000 395,113 21 Tifcnxtv Program £3.346 75:OOQ 75,000f 74.0&0 7^.0CK) 74.300 70.0KJ 442,000 495^-46 2* TDM Pmoram 105.20? 65.000 S5.00QI es.opo 65,000 €5,000 65.000 350.030 49S.307 Ii SrcycSe Route; Dtv Program 13S,?S3 18,000 i£,agoi no.GOO SO.000 SO.000 50.000 3*6.000 525.753 26 Walkway Program 520,372 2S0;CO0 250,030 250,000 250,000 380.000 .330,000 1.? 60.000 2,630.375 Z? Mrsc;pg Links Program 59.190 30,000 30,000 30,000 30,000 30f000 30.000! 1 &C-,OC0 23S.190 IB" Barrier Fre« Transition Plan fmplemer SG.OOGj 50,300 " 50,000 50,000 5G.DD0 50,000; 3X-.D0C-300.000 IS South RisnWf* Project 40S.250 2,000 2,000 40S.250 30 Project Devdopment/'Prabes'gn . 282,723 * 43,000 200.030 200,000 200.0OD-20G.DOO ' 200,000 1.14S.00O 1.430,722 3" -tricriat Circutation Program. 2S7.EDS 200,000, 250,000 250.GGD ZS0.030 2S0.OOQ 250,000 1. .450.000 1.73?.005 32 Trans Concurrency 60,000 40,000 10.000 10,000 40.000 IO.OOO 00.000 140,000 200,000 • ;a Environmental Monitoring 50.000 3C.0O0 30,COO 30,000 30,000 50,000 20D.tK.i0 345,365 3* WSOOJT Coordination Proprarn 13,7*0 85,000 65,HJD ' &o,cpa S0.000 40,000 40r0'00 330,000 349,7*, G 35 !G1S NefrCSt Ai's'essmen-t 40,331 20,000 26.000 20.CDD ' "150,000 ' 1S0.OOC 150,000 510.000 550.S31 36 jl% lor 3ne Art* 77.505 30 .G00 30,035 50.000 ' 30,000 30.000 30,000 200,000 277,505- S7 IBmisetWy 5 * Main Burnett 3SG,D00 350,000 350,030 1,050.000 1.05D.0CC 3t [NE 3rd/)4E vtith Ccfridw 223.127 2.0CC 320,000 4,050.000 1,770,000 1.640.000 1 ,t:-40:GGG 9,422.000 5,545,127 3S ll_a.kc W*sfc. 9.'.'^Park to Coulon Pk 325.4t3 SMI 3 t38,32S 220,735 545,151 ic «Und Av - SW iSih-SW A3f4 • £,00& . 5,000 S.OOO 1,914,000 £26,000 2,550.000 41 [Login Av Concr-c*e Panel Repair 430,000 4SC.D2D 450,000 42 'Earn Chasdairr Lake VVA Trail Connect .50,000 650.000 4-.3OQ,0Q0 5,000.000 6,000.000 I iT^tsi Sources' • 29,825,671 21,610,626 1£,S04,M2 12.?£6.725 12.324,BOO 27.333.390 121.eeg.83S 15S,66S,?23 m-14 2008 - 2013 SIX-YEAR TIP SUMMARY OF FUNDING SOURCES .- . • • Period ITEM Period Total 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 SIX-YEAR PROJECT COSTS: Project Development 3,889,200 539,300 642,300 667,700 • 711,300 656,300 • • 672,300 Precon Eno/Admin • 7,953,800 2.369,500 • 269,500 1.7-12,600 2,848,900 544,300 - 209,000 R-O-W (Includes Admin) 8.7S5.000 7,600,000 ' 200,000 250,000 250,000 267,000 218,000 Construction Contract 88,685,813 15,930,500 18,034,500 12,713,913 • 8,454,500 •10,063,500' • 23,498,900 Construction Ertfl/Admin 10,612,322 2,634,671 2,254,826 • 1,229,600 814,825 1,123,500 2,554,900 Olher 1,742.700 .. , 754,700 209,700 230,700 "187,209 180,200 130,200 Sub • TOTAL SIX-YEAR COST 121,668,836 29,828,671 21,610,826 16,804,513 13,266,725 12,824,800 27,333,300 SOURCE OF FUNDS: Vehicle Fuel Tax 1 3,550,000 585,000 585,000 610,000 615,000 620,000 625,000 Business License Fee ' 11,400,000 1,800,000 1,800,000 1.300,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 • 2,000,000 Proposed Fund Balance 2,695,325 2,693,347 1,978 Grants In-Hand 16,771,246 6,365,471 7,634,450 1,940,000 831,325 Milipation In-Hand 1 5,176,049 1,873,229 2.121,720 974,000 207,100 Bonds/Vehicle License Fee 2,500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 500,000 Other In-Hand 22,270,181 14,510,875 3,755,956 2,174,550 43,000 743,000 1,043,000 Sub-TOTAL SIX-YEAR FUNDED 64,462,801 .27,827,722 16,409,104 7,998,550 4,196,425 3,863,000 4,168,000 Grants Proposed . . . 9,779,000 400,000 2,084,000 • 1,160,000 1,435,000 2,700,000 .2,000,000 Mitigation Proposed L.I.D.'s Proposed / Other Proposed 6.855,949 ' 1.600,949 2,035,000 1,635,000 135,000 750,000 700,000 Undetermined 40,571.085 1,082,722 6.010,963 7,500,300 5,511,800 20,465,300 Sub - TOTAL SIX-YEAR UNFUNDED 67,206,034 .2,000,949 5,201,722 a,805,S63 . 9,070,300 8,981,800 23,1.65,300 TOTAL SOURCES - FUNDED & UNFUNDED . . 121,668,835 29,828,671 21,610,826 16,804,513 13,266,725 12,824,800 27,333,300 ' Some fufltls ate estimated earlier than expected. Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 WATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007-2012 Inventory of Existing Facilities Renton's water system provides service to an area of approximately 16 square miles and more than 14,700 customers, located in 12 hydraulically-distinct pressure zones. An inventory of the existing capital facilities in the water system is listed in Figure 8-1 and consists of 8 wells and one spring for water supply, eleven booster pump stations, eight reservoirs, water treatment facilities at each source (chlorine and fluoride and corrosion control) and approximately 283 miles of water main in service. In addition, the City maintains one standby well and seven metered connections with the City of Seattle (Cedar River and Bow Lake supply pipelines) for emergency back-up supply. Renton supplies water on a wholesale basis to Lakeridge Bryn- Mawr Water District. Level of Service Level of service for Renton's Water Utility is defined by the ability to provide an adequate amount of high quality water to all parts of the distribution system at adequate pressure during peak demand or fire. This ability is determined by the physical condition of the system and the capacity of supply, storage, treatment, pumping and distribution systems. Level of service standards for the water system vary according to the component of the overall system and are determined by the requirements established by local, state, and federal regulations. Water supply is regulated by the Washington State Department of Ecology (water rights), and the Washington State Department of Health (quantity guidelines), water quality is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Safe Drinking Water Act) and the Washington State Department of Health (primacy over Safe Drinking Water Act), system design and construction requirements are regulated by the Washington State Department of Health. The Water Utility maintains a hydraulic model of the water system. The model incorporates the pipe size and location, booster pumps, and storage to determine the flow and pressure available in each segment of the distribution system. The Utility can evaluate the impact of a specific development on the system using the model. The Water Utility reviews each development in terms of flow, pressure, and water supply required. The Water Utility's goal is to provide an adequate supply of potable water under the "worst case" scenario. This scenario considers the following conditions: failure of the largest source of supply, failure of the largest mechanical component, power failure to a single power grid, and/or a reservoir out of service. Under this scenario, the Water Utility strives to meet the following primary requirements: Pressure: Maintain a minimum of 30 pounds per square inch (psi) at the meter during normal demand conditions and a minimum of 20 psi during an emergency. Maximum allowable pressure at the meter during normal demand is 130 psi and a maximum of 150 psi during an emergency Velocity: Under normal demand conditions, the velocity in a transmission main is less than 4 feet per second (fps) and less than 8 fps during an emergency. Supply: The water supply must meet the maximum day demand and replenish storage within 72 hours with the largest source of supply out of service. m-16 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Storage: Storage volume must be maintained to provide for peak demand and adequate volume for an emergency (fire). Transmission and Distribution: The Water Utility uses design criteria approved by the Washington State Department of Health. Treatment and Monitoring: The Water Utility treats all sources with chlorine and fluoride and corrosion control. Water quality monitoring is conducted as required by the State Department of Health under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The City implements a cross connection control program to prevent cross connections with non potable sources and a wellhead protection program. Fire Flow: Fire flow required by a development is as established in the fire code and can vary from 1000 gallons per minute to 5500 gallons per minute. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2007- 2012 Based on the projected growth in population and employment by the year 2012, the existing supply of water will meet the level of service standard. As Fig. 8-1 indicates, with the addition of Wells 11, 12 and 17, the net capacity of the system is 27.07 million gallons per day, which is adequate to meet the City's anticipated growth and maximum day demand for water to at least 2020. Meeting the current fire flow level of service standards will require improvements to the existing water system if the projected commercial and industrial growth occurs. In general, fire flow is adequate to all single family and multi-family areas with the possible exception of portions of downtown, depending on the extent of new multi-family development and the type of construction. Certain areas slated for commercial and industrial growth will need upgrading of the system. Other improvements to the water system will be needed during the first six years of the Comprehensive Plan because of regulatory requirements relating to water quality and efforts to maintain the existing system at the desired level of service. The list of growth-related facilities needed to meet all of the level of service standards and regulatory requirements are in Fig. 8-2. The funds for the needed facilities are projected to come from a number of sources, including: water utility rates, connection fees, developer extension agreements, low interest loans from state or federal programs, and grants from state and federal agencies. The projected total revenue from all sources for each of the six years in also shown in Fig. 8-2. m-17 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 8-1 On-Line Supply Sources - Existing Water Supply Capacity Name Pumping Rate (gpm) Pumping Rate (mgd) Springbrook 600 0.86 Well RW-1 2,200 3.17 WellRW-2 2,200 3.17 Well RW-3 2,200 3.17 Well RW-5 A 1,400 2.02 Well PW-8 3,500 5.04 Well PW-9 1,200 1.73 WellPW-11 2,500 3.60 Well PW-12 1,500 2.16 Well PW-17 1,500 2.16 TOTAL 18,800 GPM 27.07 MGD GPM: gallon per minute MGD: million gallon per day Total annual water rights are 14,809 acre-feet per year m-18 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 8-2 Water Capital Facilities Summary of Water Utilities Capital Improvement Projects 2007-2012 Table 8-2 i Items for Development-Water 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total New Resevdirs and Pump Stations $3,380,000 $500,000 $500,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $8,380,000 Supply.Pevelopment and Wafer Quality Improvements $810,000 $3,450,000 $40,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $4,600,000 Total $4,190,000 $3,950,000 $540,000 $2,100,000 $1,100,000 $1,100,000 $12,980,000 Funding Sources- Water 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Operating $2,458,000 $ 1,641,000 $ 644,000 $ 1,260,000 $ 980,000 $ 1,022,000 $ 8,005,000 Bonds/Loans $3,688,000 $ 2,461,000 $ 966,000 $ 1,890,000 $ 1,470,000 $ 1,533,000 $ 12,008,000 SDC/SAD . $2,634,000 $ 1,758,000 $ 690,000 $ 1,350,000 $1,050,000 $ 1,095,000 $ 8,577,000 Total $8,780,000 $ 5,860,000 $ 2,300,000 $ 4,500,000 $3,500,000 $ 3,650,000 $ 28,590,000 m-19 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Figure 8-3 Existing Water System m-20 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 WASTEWATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007-2012 Inventory of Existing Facilities Renton's sanitary sewer system consists of about 205 miles of gravity sewers, 26 lift stations with associated force mains, and approximately 3,800 manholes. Wastewater is discharged to regional facilities at over 75 locations within the service area. The locations of Renton's sewer interceptors and lift stations, as well as Metro's sewer lines, are shown in Figure 9-2. The City's Wastewater Utility serves approximately 15,700 customers, which includes approximately ninety-five percent of the city's population and eighty-five percent of the city's land area. The remaining five percent of the population currently utilizes private, on-site wastewater disposal systems, typically septic system, while the balance of the land area either utilizes private systems or remains undeveloped. The capacity of the existing facilities is adequate to handle the current demand. The Lake Washington East Basin while currently having sufficient capacity, needs some improvements to portions of the Sunset Interceptor to assure sufficient capacity to accommodate anticipated growth. The West Renton Sub-basin also needs to be further evaluated to determine potential capacity restraints. A full hydraulic model has been developed to evaluate, system wide, the long term need and timing for upsizing of existing interceptors and the timing for additional interceptors for new portions of our service area. The conclusions of this analysis are included in a Final Report dated July 2006. Results from this report will be incorporated into the 2008-2013 CIP and the 2007/08 update to the Wastewater Long Range Management Plan. Level of Service Level of service for Renton's Wastewater Utility is defined by the ability to move sewage from the point of origin, the customer, to the treating agency, King County, in a safe and efficient manner. This ability is determined by the physical condition of Renton's system and the capacity available in the system. It is the Renton Wastewater Utility's responsibility to maintain the system in a safe condition and monitor the standards for new construction. The Wastewater Utility is also responsible for ensuring that capacity exists in the system prior to new connections or that the capacity is created as part of the new development. The level of service for Renton's Wastewater Utility is developed through coordination with and subject to the policies, design criteria, and standards used for planning and operating a sanitary sewer system as established by the laws and policies of several agencies. Those agencies, in order by authority, are the Department of Ecology (Criteria for Sewage Works Design), King County (King County Wastewater Treatment Division), and the City of Renton. As stated above, the Utility has developed a new hydraulic model that allows the Utility to perform dynamic analysis on any portion of its interceptor system given any scenario, to determine capacity within the system. The model is also based upon two years worth of wet- weather flow data that was developed as part of a regional effort by King County, This new tool gives us much greater ability to predict future capacity within our interceptors. The Wastewater Utility's goal is to have sufficient capacity to handle what the Utility considers the 'worst case scenario'. That is, the amount of waste if everybody was discharging their highest amount at the same time and the system was experiencing the highest amount of inflow and infiltration anticipated. m-2i ; , „ ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment A For existing and projected development Renton uses the following criteria for flow projection: Average Single Family Domestic Flow 270 gallons per day per unit Average Multi-Family Domestic Flow 190 gallons per day per unit Light Industrial 2800 gallons per acre per day Heavy Industrial site specific Commercial 2800 gallons per acre per day Office 2800 gallons per acre per day Recreation 300 gallons per acre per day Public 600 gallons per acre per day Manufacturing Park 2800 gallons per acre per day Peak Infiltration/Inflow (New System) 1500 gallons per acre per day Peak Inflow/Infiltration (Existing System) From Sewer Hydraulic Model Peaking factor for system average 2.0 X Depth to Diameter Ratio 0.80 (eight tenths) The criteria listed- above are based upon Table IV-3 of the 1998 Long Range Wastewater Management Plan, with an amendment for actual Inflow and Infiltration values based upon updated criteria from King County. This criteria is subject to change based upon the latest adopted Long Range Wastewater Management Plan or amendments thereto. These flows are averages used as standards. Actual design flows may vary considerably, depending upon land use. The Wastewater Utility will consider verifiable alternate design flows that may be submitted. If Renton's sewer system has the capacity to handle the flows projected, based upon the above criteria, or a developer improves the system to provide the capacity, the project achieves concurrence with the Wastewater Utility's level of service. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2007- 2012 Based on the forecasted growth in population and employment over the next 20 years, daily wastewater flows are predicted to increase by about 15.3 million gallons per day (mgd.) This increase is expected to impact the entire system, with the greatest impact expected to occur in the East Cedar River Basin and Lake Washington East Basin. In order to maintain the desired level of service and accommodate the projected growth, facility improvements are scheduled in both. the East Cedar River Basin and the Lake Washington East Basin over the next two years. Another factor affecting level of service is the age of the existing system. A significant portion of the city's wastewater collection and conveyance system is over fifty years old. Some of these mains cannot be relied upon to provide the desired level of service without major repair and/or replacement. Consequently, the primary component of the six-year facility plan is the repair and replacement of the existing system in order to maintain the current level of service. Some of the geographic areas in which these mains are located will experience more growth than will others, but facility improvements will be needed regardless. It is currently the policy of the Wastewater Utilities that all parcels connecting to the sewer system pay for their fair share of the system. This is accomplished in a combination of three methods: m-22 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 1. Local Improvement Districts may be formed with the city installing the sewers using LID bonds encumbering the participating parcels; 2. The Wastewater Utility may front the cost of new sewers and hold Special Assessment Districts against benefiting parcels; and 3. Developers or potential users will front the cost of extending the main with the ability to hold a latecomer agreement against the other parcels that potentially benefit. Projects that replace and rehabilitate the existing system, as well as operation and maintenance costs, will be funded through rates paid by existing customers. Existing sewer customers will not be required to participate in Special Assessment District fees, latecomer fees, or local improvement districts unless they redevelop or increase the density on their property. Table 9-1 lists the projects needed to meet growth, along with the sources of funds for them for the period 2005-2010, based upon the six-year growth projections and the desired level of wastewater service. m-23 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Figure 9-1 Wastewater Capital Facilities 2007-2012 Table 9-1 Items for Development-Wastewater 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Sanitary Sewer Main Extensions $900,000 $900,000 Lift Station Repiacement/Rehabilitation $2,200,000 $2,200,000 Funding.Sources- Wastewater 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Operating $ 735,000 $ 735,000 $ 735,000 $ 735,000 $ 735,000 S 735,000 $ 4,410,000 Bonds/Loans $1,103,000 $ 1,103,000 $ 1,103,000 $ 1,103,000 $1,103,000 $ 1,103,000 $ 6,615,000 SDC/SAD $ 788,000 $ 788,000 $ 788,000 $ 788,000 $ 788,000 $ 788,000 $ 4.725,000 Total $2,625,000 $ 2,625,000 $ 2,625,000 $ 2,625,000 $2,625,000 $ 2,625,000 $ 15,750,000 m-24 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 9-2 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Lines m-25 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 SURFACE WATER UTILITY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007- 2012 Inventory of Existing Facilities The City of Renton is composed of various drainage basins and sub-basins. The major basins within the existing City limits include the East Lake Washington, West Lake Washington, May Creek, Lower Cedar River and Black River basins. The City of Renton is located at the outlet end of a majority of these basins that discharge into either the Green/Duwamish River or into Lake Washington. The Surface Water Utility's service area within the existing City corporate boundaries is approximately 17.2 square miles. The existing surface water system includes rivers, streams, ditches, swales, lakes, wetlands, detention facilities (pond and piped systems), water quality swales, wetponds, wetvaults, oil/water separators, coalescing plate oil/water separators, pipes, catch basins, manholes, outfalls and pump stations. The natural surface water systems (rivers, streams, lakes and wetlands) are shown on Renton's Critical Area Maps. A majority of the water quantity and quality facilities are privately owned and maintained on-site as required in accordance with the Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage Ordinance (RMC Chapter 22, Section 4-22). The Surface Water Utility owns, maintains, and operates all storm and surface water management facilities located within public right-of-ways and easements dedicated for storm and surface water management purposes; The Utility currently owns, operates, and maintains approximately 204 miles of storm pipe systems including an estimated 8000 catch basin and manhole structures, 26 detention facilities and 37.67 miles of ditch systems. A combination of the public and some of the private storm system is shown in the Surface Water Utility Storm System Inventory Maps and Attributes data base which is too large to present here. Level of Service Background The Surface Water Utility's policies, design criteria, and standards used for planning, engineering, operating, and maintaining the storm and surface water systems are based upon requirements that originate from many sources. Together, these regulations define the acceptable level of service for surface water. The intended level of service is to accomplish the following: » Provide adequate of surface water management for the appropriate rainfall duration and intensity to protect public safety, property and convenience of areas within City; • Provide a level of storm water treatment that adequately protects surface and groundwater quality and other beneficial uses of water bodies; • Provide flow control from new construction that restricts the rate of storm water runoff to pre-developed level; and . • Provide protection of fish and wildlife habitat. The primary Federal, State and local agencies and regulations which affect the City of Renton's level of service standard for surface and storm water systems are listed below: m-26 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 1. Federal Agencies/Regulations/Policies: a. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): i. Federal Clean Water Act ii. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit) b. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) i. Nationwide/404 Individual Permit Requirements ii. Federal Emergency Management Act standards m-27 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 2. State Agencies/Regulations: a. Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE): i. NPDES Phase 2 Municipal Storm Water Permit ii. NPDES Construction Storm Water Permit iii. 401 Water Quality Certification Permits iv. Coastal Zone Management Consistency Permit v. Shoreline Management Program (SMP) vi. The Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan vii. 2005 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington b. Washington State Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (WDFW) i. Hydraulic Project Approval Permits 3. Local Agencies/Regulations/Policies: a. Cedar River Basin Plan b. May Creek Basin Plan c. Green River Basin Plan d. Green River Flood Control Zone District/Green River Basin Program e. King County Flood Hazard Management Plan e. King County Surface Water Design Manual as adapted by Renton Level of Service Standard in Renton The Surface Water Utility level of service is the adopted surface water design standards which are consistent with the above referenced federal, state, and local regulations as specified in the City of Renton Storm and Surface Water Drainage ordinance (RMC 4-22). New surface water management systems are designed to accommodate the future land use condition runoff based upon the city's Land Use Element and the future land use plans of neighboring jurisdictions. The Western Washington National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit required the City to adopt new storm and surface water design standards that are equivalent to the standards in the 2005 Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. To comply with this requirement, the City has adopted the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual with City of Renton Amendments in February 2010 to comply with the requirement. Projects in areas of the City will have to comply with this design standard. Projects that comply with the above-cited standards will achieve an acceptable level of service for surface water management purposes within the City of Renton. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2007- 2012 The capital facilities estimated to be needed to solve current surface water management problems and to prevent future surface water management problems associated with the growth projected for the first six years of the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed sources of funding are listed in Figure 10-1. m-28 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The sources of revenues to be utilized by the Surface Water Utility to implement the needed capital improvements include the following: 1. Surface Water Utility rates; 2. Permit fees and system development charges; 3. Developer installed improvements 4. Revenue bonds; 5. Private latecomers agreements; 6. Surface Water Utility Special Assessment Districts; 7. Low interest loans (state revolving funds, Public Works Trust Fund); 8. Cost-sharing interlocal agreements with adjacent jurisdictions and special districts; 9. Army Corps of Engineers - Section 205 Small Flood Control Projects Program and other financial assistance programs available to municipalities authorized by Congress; 10. USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Watershed Flood Prevention and Protection Act (Public Law 566) and other SCS programs; 11. Grants from state and federal agencies such as: a. Washington State Department of Ecology Centennial Grant Program and Clean Water Act Section 319 Grant Program; b. Washington State Department of Ecology Flood Control Assistance Account Program; c. Washington State Salmon Recovery Funding Board and other grants that may be available from the County, State or Federal Government to improve fish habitat in response to Endangered Species Act listing; d. Washington State legislative appropriations approved for Special Surface Water Utility projects; e. Washington State Department of Ecology Capacity Grants related to fund programs required by the NPDES Phase II Municipal Stormwater Permit f. Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Retrofit and Low Impact Development grants; and 12. Other unidentified federal, state, and local grant programs. m-29 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 As is evident in Figure 10-1 on the following page, the Surface Water Utility proposed to use all or any combination of the financial sources to fund the needed capital facilities. m-30 Table 10-1 Items.for Development-Surface Water 2007 2Q08 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Springbrook Creek Wetland and Habitat Mitigation Bank $150,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $650,000 Storm System Improvement and Replacement $125,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,150,000 $950,000 $850,000 $5,675,000 Springbrook Creek Improvements $1,300,000 $100,000 $200,000 $1,600,000 Cedar RIver.'BasIn $150,000 $700,000 $850,000 Green River Ecosystem Restoration $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 $60,000 Total $1,585,000 $1,310,000^ $l,5io,6o6i $1,410,000 $1,860,000 $1,160,000 $8,835,000 Funding Sources- Surface Water 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Operating $ 713,000 . $ 589,000 $ 651,000 $ 620,000 $ 868,000 $ 899,000 $ 4,340,000 Bonds/Loans $1,173,000 $ 969,000 $. 1,071,000 $ 1,020,000 $1,428,000 $ 1,479,000 $ 7,140,000 SDC/SAD $ 391,000 $ 323,000 $ 357,000 $ 340,000 $ 476,000 $ 493,000 $ 2,380,000 Undetermined $ 23,000 $ 19,000 $ 21,000 $ 20,000 $ 28,000 $ 29,000 $ 140,000 Tota $2,300,000 $ 1,900,000 $ 2,100,000 $ 2,000,000 $2,800,000 $ 2,900,000 $ 14,000,000 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007- 2012 Inventory of Existing Facilities The City of Renton is the primary provider of park and recreation services within the city limits. These services include parks, indoor facilities, open space areas and recreation programs. Other suppliers that provide facilities and services include the Renton School District and several private enterprises. Figure 11-1 below is a summary of the amount of park and open space area provided by the City of Renton; provided by others within the City's Proposed Annexation Area (PAA) and the total for the overall Planning Area. Fig. 11-1 Park and Open Space Areas Summary Type of Facility Renton PAA Planning Area Total Neighborhood Parks 97.37 20.20 117.57 Community Parks 130.36 93.36 223.72 Regional Parks 55.33 50.00 105.33 Open Space Areas 683.11 178.81 861,92 Linear Parks & Trails 12.04 Miles/ 1 acre 0.00 12.04/1 Special Use Parks & Facilities 190.66 0.00 190.66 TOTAL 1157.83 342.37 1500.2 Figures 11-2 and 11-3 on the following pages list the individual park and open space areas that comprise the categories summarized above. Figurel 1-2 details Renton's Parks and Open Spaces by category and Figure 11-3 lists public land in Renton's PAA. The table lists the name of each park or open space, its size in acres, and its status as of January 2001. m-32 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 11-2 Public Park and Open Space Areas in Renton Detailed Listing Park Acres Status Neighborhood Parks (20) Earlington Park 1.54 Developed Glencoe Park .42 Developed Heritage Park 9.18 Developed Jones Park 1.18 Developed Kennydale Beach 1.76 Developed Kennydale Lions Park 5.66 Developed Kiwanis Park 9.00 Developed Maplewood Park 2.20 Developed Maplewood Roadside Park 1.00 Developed North Highlands Park 2.64 Developed Philip Arnold Park 10.00 Developed Riverview Park 11.50 Developed Sit In Park 0.50 Developed Springbrook Watershed Park 16.00 Undeveloped Sunset Court 0.50 Developed Talbot Hill Reservoir 2.50 Developed Thomas Teasdale Park 10.00 Developed Tonkins Park 0.29 Developed Tiffany Park 7.00 Developed Windsor Hill Park 4.50 Developed TOTAL 97.37 Acres Community Parks (7) Cedar River Park 23.07 Developed Cedar River Trail Park 24.20 Developed Highlands Park 10.40 Developed Liberty Park 11.89 Developed Narco Property 15.00 Undeveloped Piazza & Gateway 0.80 Developed Ron Regis Park 45.00 Developed TOTAL 130.36 Acres Regional Parks (1) Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 55.33 Developed TOTAL 55.33 Acres Open Space Areas (10) Black River Riparian Forest 92.00 Undeveloped Cedar River Natural Area 237.00 Undeveloped Cleveland Property 23.66 Undeveloped Honey Creek 35.73 Undeveloped Lake Street 1.00 Undeveloped May Creek/McAskill 10.00 Undeveloped m-33 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 May Creek Greenway 29.82 Undeveloped Panther Creek Wetlands 73.00 Undeveloped Renton Wetlands 125.00 Undeveloped Springbrook Watershed 38.00 Undeveloped Edlund/Korum Property 17.90 Undeveloped TOTAL 683.11 Acres Linear Parks & Trails (9) Burnett Linear Park 1.0 acre Developed Cedar River Trail 4.5 miles Developed Honey Creek Trail .1.0 miles Developed Springbrook Trail 2.0 miles Developed S.W. 16* Trail .5 miles Developed Garden/1 e^/Houser 1.0 miles Developed Lake Washington Blvd 1.5 miles Developed Gene Coulon Park 1.5 miles Developed Ripley Lane .04 miles Developed TOTAL 12.04 Miles/1 Acre Special Use Parks & Facilities (10) Boathouse Carco Theatre (310 seats) Community Garden/Greenhouse Henry Moses Aquatic Center (including bldgs.) Highlands Neighborhood Center Ivar's Restaurant Kidd Valley Restaurant Kiwanis Park Neighborhood Center Liberty Park Skate Park Maplewood Golf Course Maplewood Golf Course/Restaurant/Pro Shop Maplewood Golf Course Driving Range North Highlands Neighborhood Center Philip Arnold Neighborhood Center Renton Community Center Renton Senior Activity Center Teasdale Park Neighborhood Center Tiffany Park Neighborhood Center Veterans Memorial Park TOTAL 195,904 s. 4,242 s.f. 11,095 s.f. 960 s.f/.46 acres 58,088 s.f. 11,906 s.f. 1,540 s.f. 2,150 s.f. 1,370 s.f. 14,250 s.f. 190 acres 15,508 s.f. 11,559 s.f. 4,432 s.f. 1,370 s.f. 36,000 s.f. 18,264 s.f. 1,370 s.f. 1,800 s.f. 0.2 acres £ 190.66 Acres Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed CITY-WIDE TOTAL 1,157.83 Acres 12.04 Miles 195,904 Square Feet m-34 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 11-3 Public Park and Open Space Areas in Renton's Proposed Annexation Areas (PAAs) Petrovitsky Park Detailed Listing 50.0 Acres Sub-Total (Community Parks) 50.0 Acres Developed Maplewood Community Park Site Skyway Park Boulevard Lane Park 40.0 Acres 23.08 Acres 30.28 Acres Sub-Total (Community Parks) 93.36 Acres Sierra Heights Park Maplewood Park Cascade Park 4.7 Acres 4.8 Acres 10.7 Acres Sub-Total (Neighborhood Parks) 20.2 Acres May Creek Greenway Renton Park Maplewood Heights Bryn Mawr Sub-Total (Open Space) Total, Public Park and Open Space Within Renton's Proposed Annexation Areas 150.0 Acres 19.0 Acres 5.0 Acres 4.81 Acres 178.81 Acres .342.37 Acres Lind berg/Ren ton Pool Total (Special Use Facilities). Undeveloped Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed In addition to the park and open space areas, the city operates a number of specialized facilities as an ongoing component of the total recreational services it provides. Figurel 1-4 which follows lists the specialized facilities owned by the city as well as those specialized public facilities within the city limits that are owned by others. m-35 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 11-4 Specialized Facilities within the Renton City Limits Number Facility Comments Ballfields City-owned: Cedar River Park Highlands Park Kennydale Lions Park Kiwanis Park Liberty Park Maplewood Park Ron Regis Philip Arnold Park Thomas Teasdale Park Tiffany Park TOTAL Within the city limits but owned by others: 2 Hazen High School 2 Highlands Elementary School 1 Hillcrest School 4 Honeydew Elementary School 3 McKnight Middle School 4 Nelson Middle School 4 Renton High School 1 Talbot Hill Elementary 1 Tiffany Park Elementary TOTAL 2 lighted Small Field Lighted Lighted 11 FIELDS Small Fields Small Field Small Fields Small Fields 22 FIELDS Number Facility Comments Football/Soccer Fields City -owned: 1 Cedar River Park 1 Highlands Park 1 Kiwanis Park 1 Philip Arnold Park 1 Ron Regis Park 1 Thomas Teasdale Park 1 Tiffany Park TOTAL Within the city limits but owned by others: 1 Hillcrest School 2 Honeydew Elementary School 1 Kennydale Elementary 1 McKnight Middle School 1 Renton High School 1 Renton Stadium TOTAL 1 lighted 1 lighted 7 FIELDS 1 lighted 7 FIELDS m-36 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Tennis Courts City-owned: 2 Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 2 Highlands Park 2 lighted 2 Kiwanis Park 3 Liberty Park 3 lighted 1 North Highlands Park 2 Philip Arnold Park 2 lighted 3 Talbot Hill Reservoir 2 Tiffany Park TOTAL 17 COURTS Within the city limits but owned by others: 4 Hazen High School 4 McKnight Middle School 2 Nelson Middle School 5 Renton High School TOTAL 15 COURTS Swimming Pools Within the city limits but owned by others: 1 Hazen High School Indoor TOTAL 1 POOL Level of Service Standards for park and recreation levels of service were first established nationally based on "Standard Demand" and have been modified at state and local levels to meet local needs. The national level of service (LOS) standards were established by committees of recreation professionals based on practical experience in the field, and are felt to be most useful in quantifiable terms, i.e. acres of park land per population served. The most recognized standards are those developed by the National Recreation Park Association (NRPA). In 1983 that organization published a report titled "Recreation, Park and Open Space Standards" that is well recognized in the recreation field. The Park CFP establishes a 2-tiered approach: 1) an overall LOS standard based on total population and total acreage; and 2) LOS standards for individual neighborhoods and for specific types of parks and facilities within parks. The overall LOS is a gauge of whether the City is meeting overall concurrence for GMA. The second tier identifies areas where deficiencies exist so the City can target its funds to eliminate those deficiencies while still maintaining overall LOS. The proposed LOS standard for park and open space land established for Renton in its Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space plan is 18.58 acres/1,000 population. The 2007 LOS in Renton is 19.84 acres/1,000 population. The LOS within Renton's Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) is only 5.35 acres/1,000, which reduces the 2007 overall Planning Area LOS to 12.26 acres/1,000. Continued acquisition of park and open space lands will be needed as the City's residential growth continues within its existing boundaries, and as it expands into its underserved PAA's. The recommended service levels for Renton were developed after discussions with City staff and the Board of Park Commissioners. They are based on participation ratios by which a community can estimate in quantifiable terms the number of acres or facilities required to meet the population demand. Attaching a standard to a population variable makes it easy to forecast future needs as the population grows. The table below identifies the current overall LOS in Renton and within Renton's planning area. m-37 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig 11-5 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) - OVERALL Park & Open Space Land Existing Population LOS (Acres/1,000) City of Renton 1,157.83 58,360 19.84 Renton's PAA's 342.37 64,000 5.35 Total Planning Area 1,500.2 112,360 12.26 Starting below, existing service levels and recommended standards by park types within Renton are given. Each park type compares the NRPA Standard to the existing service levels and the recommended standards. This information.is provided to indicate how Renton's current level of service compares to national and local standards. m-38 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Figure 11-6 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) - BY PARK TYPE Figures shown are in acres/1,000 population Park and Open Space Areas 1. Neighborhood Parks Definition: Neighborhood parks are small park areas (usually 2-10 acres in size) utilized for passive use and unstructured play. They often contain an open space for field sports, a children's playground, a multi- purpose paved area, a picnic area and a trail system. For heavily wooded sites, the amount of active use area is substantially reduced. NRPA Standard 1-2 Acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Renton): 1.7 Acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning .32 Acres/1,000 Population Comments: The recommended standard reflects the shifting emphasis on larger parks and open space recreational opportunities that cost less to maintain and operate than do neighborhood parks. 2. Community Parks Definition: Community parks are traditionally larger sites that can accommodate organized play and contain a wider range of facilities. They usually have sport fields or other major use facilities as the central focus of the park. In many cases, they will also serve the neighborhood park function. Community parks generally average 10-25 acres in size with a substantial portion of them devoted to active use. Sometimes, smaller sites with a singular purpose that maintain a community-wide focus- can be considered community parks. NRPA Standard: 5-8 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Renton): 2.25 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Planning 1.46 acres/1,000 population Comments: The low existing ratio reflects a past emphasis within Renton on neighborhood parks. While the recommended standard is well below the NRPA standard, it represents a shifting emphasis to community parks. 3. Regional Parks Definition: Regional parks are large park areas that serve geographical areas that stretch beyond the community. They may serve a single purpose or offer a wide range of facilities and activities. In many cases they Area) Recommended LOS Standard: 1.2 Acres/1,OOO'Population Area): Recommended LOS Standard: 2.5 acres/1,000 population m-39 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 also contain large areas of undeveloped open space. Many regional parks are acquired because of unique features found or developed on the site. NRPA Standard: 5-10 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Renton: .95 acres/1,000 population Existing LOS (Planning Area): .78 acres/1,000 population Recommended Standard: 1.08 acres/1,000 population Comments: Renton has the potential for developing another regional park located in the Cedar River corridor. The recommended standard of 1.08 acres per 1,000 population recognizes the potential for creating a Cedar River Regional Park consisting of the following Special Use Parks: Cedar River Park, Maplewood Roadside Park, Maplewood Golf Course, and the Cedar River Property. 4. Open Space Areas Definition: This type of park area is defined as general open space, trail systems, and other undeveloped natural areas that includes stream corridors, ravines, easements, steep hillsides or wetlands. Often they are acquired to protect an environmentally sensitive area or wildlife habitats. In other cases they may be drainage corridors or heavily wooded areas. Sometimes trail systems are found in these areas. Existing LOS (Renton) 11.71acres/l,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning 2.8 acres/1,000 Population Area): Recommended LOS 12.7 acres/1,000 Population Standard: Comments: The majority of this type of land is wetlands, steep slopes, or otherwise not suitable for recreational development. 5. Linear Parks Definition: Linear parks are open space areas, landscaped areas, trail systems and other land that generally follow stream corridors, ravines or other elongated features, such as a street, railroad or power line easement. This type of park area usually consists of open space with development being very limited. Trail systems are often a part of this type of area. Existing LOS (Renton): .02 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning 0 acres/1,000 Population Area): Recommended Standard: 0.3 acres/1,000 Population Comments: The majority of linear park land is found along the banks of the Cedar River and Honey Creek. There are other opportunities for linear parks utilizing utility corridors. 6. Special Use Parks and Facilities Definition: Specialized parks and facilities include areas that generally restrict public access to certain times of the day or to specific recreational activities. The golf course and major structures are included in this category. Existing LOS (Renton): 3.7 acres/1,000 Population m-40 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Existing LOS (Planning 0 acres/1,000 Population Area): Recommended Standards: 0.8 acres/1,000 Population 7. Total Park Land Presently, Renton has 1157.83acres of total park land within the city boundaries. Together with another 342.37 acres of public park and open space land within Renton's PAAs (Potential Annexation Areas), the total amount of park and open space land within Renton's planning area is l,500.2acres. NRPA Standard: 15-20 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Renton): 19.84 acres/1,000 Population Existing LOS (Planning Area): 5.35 acres/1,000 Population Recommended LOS Standard: 18.58 acres/1,000 Population Comments: While the recommended standard of 18.58 acres per 1,000 population seems high, most of the acreage is in the open space category. Most of this land is undevelopable as steep hillsides, wetlands, or environmentally sensitive areas. Specialized Facilities Below are the recommended levels of service for specialized recreation facilities. In addition to the NRPA standard and the existing facility ratio, an estimate of the participation level in Renton compared to the average for the Pacific Northwest is also provided. The existing inventory includes City-owned facilities as well as those facilities within the city limits owned by other public entities. 1. Ballfields (Includes baseball and softball fields) NRPA Standard: 1 field per 2,500 population Existing Participation: Average Existing Inventory: 20 fields * Existing Facility Ratio: .9 field per 2,500 population Recommended Standard: 1 field per 2,500 population * Small fields were excluded for purposes of evaluation. 2. Football/Soccer Fields NRPA Standard: 1 field per 10,000 population Existing Participation: 75 % below average Existing Inventory: 26 fields Existing Facility Ratio: 1.3 fields per 3,000 population Recommended Standard: 1 field per 3,000 population Comments Because of the extremely high existing facility ratio and the below average participation rate, the recommended standard—while substantially above the NRPA standard—is roughly the same as the existing facility ratio. 3. Tennis Courts NRPA Standard: 1 court per 2,000 population Existing Participation: 15 % below average Existing Inventory: 32 courts Existing Facility Ratio: 1.4 courts per 2,5 00 population Recommended Standard: 1 court per 2,500 population m-4i Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Comments Based on the substantially above average existing facility ratio, the recommended standard is almost equivalent to the existing facility ratio. 4. Swimming Pools (indoor) NRPA Standard: 1 pool per 20,000 population Existing Participation: Average Existing Inventory: 1 indoor pool Existing Facility Ratio: ..68 per 40,000 population Recommended Standard: 1 pool per 40,000 population 5. Walking Trails Existing Participation: Existing Inventory: Existing Facility Ratio: Recommended Standard: 16% above average 9.0 miles (off-street) .15 miles per 1,000 population .20 miles per 1,000 population Comments The recommended standard reflects a strong local interest in walking trails and the fact that the city directed its efforts to other areas until recent years. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2007- 2012 Figure 1 l-7on the following page shows the projects which may need to be begun over the next six years to achieve the recommended level of service standards if the forecast growth — and therefore, demand — occurs. Figure 11-8 also includes potential funding sources for each project, where known. m-42 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 11 - 7 Parks Capital Facilities 2007-2012 Table 11 -4 I Items for Development 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 ] Total Black River Riparian Forest $85,000 $.100,000 $200,000 $2,000,000 $2,385,000 Sam Chastain Waterfront Trail $500,000 $4,000,000! ! $4,500,000 Family Aquatic Center $120,000 $120,000. $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000; $720,000 Grant Matching Program $200,000 $100,000; $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $700,000 Maplewood Community Park Development $100,000: $300,000 $3,000,000 $3,000,000 $6,400,000 New Maintenance Facility $335,000 $4,000,000! $2,000,000 $6,192,000 North Highlands Community Center $250,000; $1,750,000 $2,000,000 Parks Long Range Plan $60,000 $60,000 Regis Park Athletic Field Expansion $200,000: $2,300,000 $2,500,000 Springbrook Trail .Missing Link $1,600,000 $1,600,000 Tiffany Park Recreation Building $15,000 $15,000 Total $2,830,000 $8,770,000! $6,655,000 $3,320,000 $420,000 $5,220,000 $27,072,000 m-43 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 11 - 8 Parks Capital Facilities 2007-2012 Table 11-5 Funding Sources 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Total Operating $2,755,000. $ 220,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 $ 3,855,000 Bond Proceeds $ 3,100,000 $ 500,000 $ 3,600,000 Mitigation $2,265,000 $ 2,265,000 Undetermined $ 181,000 $ 7,820,000 S 7,150,000 $ 4,512,000 $ 941,000 $ 5,631,000 $ 26,235,000 Total $5,201,000 $11,140,000 $ 7,870,000 $ 4,732,000 $1,161,000 $ 5,851,000 $ 35,955,000 m-44 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 GENERAL GOVERNMENT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2007- 2012 FIRE DEPARTMENT CAPITAL FACILITIES Inventory of Existing Facilities The Renton Fire Department provides fire protection services from six locations: Fire Department Headquarters is located on the sixth floor of City Hall at 1055 Grady Way; Station 11 which is in the downtown area and serves the central part of the city; Station 12 which is located in Renton Highlands and serves the north and east portions of the city; Station 13 which is located in the Talbot Hill area and serves the southeast portion of the city; and Station 14 is located at Lind & S. 19th Street and serves the South portion of Renton. Additionally, King County Fire District 25 operationally is part of the Renton fire protection system; it serves the east portion of the city as well as portions of King County. Figure 13-1 on the following page shows the locations of the fire stations. Currently Station 11 is staffed by 9 personnel and is equipped with one engine company, one ladder company, one aid car and one command unit. Station 12 is staffed by 5 personnel and is equipped with one engine company and one aid car. Stations 13, 14, and 16 are staffed by three personnel and equipped with an engine and an aid unit. The City's water system is also a critical component of fire protection service. Currently all areas of the city are served by the city water system. Level of Service Historically, level of service for fire suppression has been measured in a variety of qualitative and quantitative terms. However, in the city's Fire Department Master Plan (1987) the primary level of service criteria were response time and fire flow. In the next capital facilities plan, there will be a shift in the placement of fife stations with a goal of providing a city wide fire and emergency service coverage net that maintains a 90th percentile response goal. Meeting this goal will ensure that all citizens can expect the same response time 90% of the time. Response time is an important criterion for level of service because there is a direct relationship between both how long a fire burns and how long a person can survive with their heart beating. The ultimate goal of the fire and emergency service system is the preservation of human life. Obviously, the need to extinguish fires is also a criterion for measuring the level of service for the fire and emergency services system, as fire is one of the more likely causes of significant property damage in the city. Fire flow refers to the amount of water that is available to spray on a fire and extinguish it. Understandably, water is an essential element for fire suppression, and the hotter a fire, the more water that must be available to extinguish it. Determining what is adequate fire flow depends upon a building's type of construction, floor area, and use. For example, adequate fire flow in the city's water system for a single-family wood frame house is 1,000 gallons per minute (gpm) whereas adequate fire flow for a shopping center or an industrial park is approximately 4,500 gpm. The third aspect of establishing level of service is personnel. Having trained firefighters in sufficient numbers is crucial to putting out a fire safely and efficiently. The city strives to comply with national standards relative to the staffing of fire apparatus as it is the placement of personnel at the location of the incident that for the basis for the success of the fire and emergency service delivery system. According to national standards: 1. Acceptable response time is defined as having the first responding unit arrives on the incident scene in within five minutes of receipt of the response 90% of the time. 2. Acceptable response time is for the basic firefighting force (15 personnel) is nine minutes from the receipt of the response 90% of the time. ni-45 A„ , t. ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment A 3. Acceptable fire flow is defined as having water available to all parts of the city in sufficient quantity and pressure to extinguish the worst-case fire in an existing or projected land use. 4. Acceptable staffing is defined as having four firefighters on each piece of firefighting apparatus. Though the goal of the city is to comply with nationally recognized standards, the ability to meet these standards is subject to resource availability at the time of an incident, rather than an absolute. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan 2007- 2012 With the exception of a few isolated small areas of the city, the five minute response time level of service standard is being met 63.8% of the time, which is 70.8% of the national standard. Similarly, the adequate fire flow level of service standard is being met city-wide. Generally, fire flows are adequate throughout the city, a long-range water system plan is being implemented to upgrade the few low fire flow areas, and development standards and review procedures are in place, which require that necessary fire suppression measures are made available for all new construction. In the east Renton area the agreement with Fire District 25 whereby the city has assumed operational control of that facility coupled with Station 12 and the water system plan for the area should assure that both response time and fire flow standards will be maintained. In the Kennydale area a new station 15 will be constructed over the next six years. The station will be staffed with four firefighters, seven days a week. This means an additional fifteen firefighters along with the purchase of equipment. The total project includes the purchase of land, design, construction, hiring personnel, and purchase of equipment. Presently the northerly portion of the area is within the ten-minute response time standard but outside of the five-minute response time standard for Station 12. Over the next six years, some single family and multi-family growth is projected for the Kennydale/Highlands area, as is some employment growth. This growth would increase somewhat the Importance of providing improved service to the area in the near term. Given the residential and employment growth projected for the area after the year 2006, the importance of taking actions to improve the five-minute response time coverage increase substantially during that period. Land has been acquired to construct Fire Station #15 in the Kennydale area and there could be a need for an additional station in the eastern portion of the city on or near Duvall Avenue in north of NE 4th. The Fire Department is in the process of acquiring software that will help with this analysis. The City also anticipated improvements to Valley Communications Facilities over the next six years. Station 14 was built in the Valley industrial area to help handle the projected employment and multi- family growth for the area. In addition, there is still a need for a new facility for Station 13 due to its physical limitations in terms of its ability to accommodate the necessary equipment and personnel to maintain the current level of service standards as growth occurs. Station 13 was built as a temporary facility, until a current level of service standards as growth occurs. King County Fire District #40 has constructed a new state of the art facility in the Benson Hill potential annexation area. This will be inside Renton City limits should an annexation of this area occur. The Fire Department is in discussions with King County Fire district #40 regarding a potential contract that would provide service to the district in the same way that services are provided to King County Fire District #25. m-46 m-47 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 2007- 2012 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN The Neighborhood Grant Program currently provides $50,000 to be distributed in small matching grants to organized associations that from recognized geographic neighborhoods in Renton. The grant projects must be a benefit to the pubic, create physical improvements, build and enhance a neighborhood feature and be within Renton City limits. Over the next six years, the funding for this program is expected to increase to $110,000 by 2012. $1.5 million dollars of funding for infrastructure implementation in the Highlands Study Area has been set aside in City reserves. New development in this area will require additional investments to stimulate redevelopment. m-48 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 13-2 General Government Capital Facilities 2007-2012 c & E CL O © > CO Q rr o Jo w CO £ a IL. m-49 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 SUNSET AREA COMMUNITY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN Introduction The City of Renton prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in 2010-2011 that addresses the Sunset Area Community Planned Action, which includes redevelopment of the Sunset Terrace public housing community and associated neighborhood growth and revitalization (known as the proposal in the EIS). Sunset Terrace's redevelopment provides the opportunity to evaluate the broader Sunset Area Community neighborhood and determme what future land use redevelopment is desirable and what public service and infrastructure improvements should be made to create a more vibrant and attractive community for residents, businesses, and property owners. The objective of the proposal is to promote the redevelopment of public housing, implement infrastructure improvements throughout the Planned Action Study Area, and facilitate planning and environmental review for the Planned Action Study Area. The proposal was reviewed in terms of four alternatives. • Alternative 1, No Action. The No Action Alternative represents conditions where Sunset Terrace public housing redevelopment would not occur, and very limited public investment would be implemented in the neighborhood (e.g., some community services but no NE Sunset Boulevard or master drainage plan improvements), resulting in lesser redevelopment across the Planned Action Study Area. A Planned Action would not be designated. The No Action Alternative is required to be studied under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). • Alternative 2. This alternative represents a moderate level of growth in the Planned Action Study Area based on investment in mixed-income housing and mixed uses in the Potential Sunset Terrace Redevelopment Subarea, targeted infrastructure and public services throughout the Planned Action Study Area, and adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance. • Alternative 3. This alternative represents the highest level of growth in the Planned Action Study Area based on investment in the Potential Sunset Terrace Redevelopment Subarea, with a greater number dwellings developed in a mixed-income, mixed-use style; major public investment in study area infrastructure and services; and adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance. • Preferred Alternative. This alternative represents neighborhood growth in the Planned Action Study Area similar to but slightly less than that of Alternative 3 based on investment in the Potential Sunset Terrace Redevelopment Subarea, with a moderate number dwellings developed in a mixed-income, mixed-use style and oriented around a larger park space and loop road; major public investment in study area infrastructure and services; and adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance. The EIS analyzed future growth and the improvements needed to support that growth for the period 2011-2030, thereby providing for a list of capital improvements in transportation, utilities, and parks that extend beyond the City's existing 2022 planning horizon. The capital infrastructure improvements described in the EIS for the Sunset Area Community which may be needed within the 2022 planning horizon are accounted for within this section of the City's Capital Facilities Element. At such time as the City is required to update its Comprehensive Plan, it will identify the updated planned m-50 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 improvements, their cost, and funding sources needed within the Capital Facilities Element's updated planning period. The planned action neighborhood study area described in the EIS is generally bounded by NE 21st Street on the north, Monroe Avenue NE on the east, NE 7th Street on the south, and Edmonds Avenue NE. Capital improvements necessary to support the growth anticipated in the EIS are generally found within this area. Transportation The Sunset Area Community EIS identified the following transportation improvements that will be needed in the Sunset Area Community within the 2011-2030 analysis period: Sunset Boulevard - NE Park Drive to Monroe Ave NE arterial improvements NE 10th Street - Sunset Blvd to Harrington Ave NE street improvements Sunset Lane - NE 10th Street to Harrington Ave NE street extensions Sunset Area Green Connections pedestrian/stormwater enhancements NE 12th Street/Edmonds Avenue LOS intersection improvements NE 12th Street/Edmonds Avenue LOS intersection improvements These improvements are identified in the Renton Arterial Plan in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan (#19B). The total cost for these identified projects is estimated at $37.2 million. Only the portion of these projects that would occur by 2022 would be added to the City's Transportation Element's finance subsection. Estimated total project costs and revenue sources are identified in Table 14-1 below. Fig. 14-1 Sunset Area Community Transportation Capital Facilities 2011-2030 Project Title Total Cost (2011 Dollars) Sunset Boulevard - NE Park Dr. to Monroe Avenue NE $22,500,000 NE 10th Street — Sunset Boulevard to Harrington Avenue NE $1,118,000 Sunset Lane - NE 10th Street to Harrington Avenue NE $936,000 Sunset Area Green Connections $13,454,000 NE 12th Street/Edmonds Avenue, LOS intersection improvements $170,000 NE 12th Street/ Harrington Avenue, LOS intersection improvements $180,000 Total Cost $38,358,000 Source: CH2MHI11 and ICF International. 2011. Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact Statement Final. April. (ICF 00593.10.) Bellevue and Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton and the Renton Housing Authority, Renton, WA. Project funding for the Sunset Area Community Transportation projects identified above is anticipated to come from Federal, state, and other grant sources, as w;ell as developer contributions within the planned action area. Water m-5i Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The Sunset Area Community EIS identified the water capital facility improvements found in Figure 14-2 as necessary to support anticipated growth the Sunset Area Community within the 2011-2030 analysis period. Total associated project costs are also found in Figure 14-2. Fig. 14-2 Sunset Area Community Water Capital Facilities 2011-2030 Project Title Total Cost (2011 Dollars) Sunset 565 Zone Loop (North of NE 12th Street) $993,750 Sunset 565 Zone Loop, Kirkland Avenue (South of NE 12th Street) $562,500 Sunset 565 Zone Loop, Harrington Avenue (South of NE 12th Street) $393,750 Sunset Fireflow 565 Zone Fireflow Upgrades A-G $403,125 Total Cost $2,353,125 Source: CH2MHill and ICF International. 2011. Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact Statement Final. April. (ICF 00593.10.) Bellevue and Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton and the Renton Housing Authority, Renton, WA. The funds for needed facilities are projected to come from a combination of water system development charges, and developer contributions from within the planned action area. Wastewater The Sunset Area Community EIS identified the wastewater capital facility improvements found in Figure 14-3 as necessary to support anticipated growth the Sunset Area Community within the 2011- 2030 analysis period. Total associated project costs are also found in Figure 14-3. Fig. 14-3 Sunset Area Community Wastewater Capital Facilities 2011-2030 Project Title Total Cost (2011 Dollars) Sunset Boulevard Capacity Upgrades $400,000 Harrington Avenue Capacity Upgrades $275,625 Kirkland Avenue Capacity Upgrades $210,000 Edmonds Avenue Capacity Upgrades $118,125 Total Cost $1,003,750 Source: CH2MHill and ICF International. 2011. Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact Statement. Final. April. (ICF 00593.10.) Bellevue and Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton and the Renton Housing Authority, Renton, WA The funds for needed facilities are projected to come from operating funds and developer contributions from within the planned action area. Surface Water The Sunset Area Community EIS and Sunset Area Surface Water Master Plan identified the surface water capital facility improvements found in Figure 14-4 as necessary to support anticipated growth the Sunset Area Community within the 2011-2030 analysis period. Total associated project costs are also found in Figure 14-4. m-52 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Fig. 14-4 Sunset Area Community Surface Water Capital Facilities 2011-2030 Project Title Total Cost (2011 Dollars) Regional Facility (Sunset Terrace) $722,700 Green Connections Harrington Green Connection - 16th Street to 12m Street $602,250 Harrington Green Connection - 12th Street to 10th Street $328,500 Harrington Green Connection - Sunset Boulevard to NE 9th Street $459,900 12th Street Green Connection $646,050 Edmonds Avenue Green Connection - 12th Street to 10th Place $372,300 Edmonds Avenue Green Connection - 10th Place to 6th Street $755,550 Jefferson Green Connection $328,250 Storm Drainage Conveyance Improvements Kirkland Avenue Storm Drainage $602,250 Glennwood Avenue Storm Drainage $328,500 Total Cost $5,146,250 Source: CH2MHU1 and ICF International. 2011. Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact Statement. Final. April. (ICF 00593.10.) Bellevue and Seattle, WA. Prepared for City of Renton and the Renton Housing Authority, Renton, WA. The funds for needed facilities are projected to come through a variety of sources and means. Public funding will be sought through grant programs, dedication of funds through City Council or partial funding through available utility fees. Where public funding cannot be secured, the remaining funding will be provided by future development through a combination of frontage improvements and fee assessments under various structures depending on applicable city codes, implementation schedule and rate of redevelopment such as collection of impact fees, fee in lieu of mitigation and special assessment districts Parks The Sunset Area Community EIS identified a needed capital project for development of Sunset Park during the 2011-2030 analysis period. Total associated project costs are also found in Figure 14-5. Fig. 14-5 Sunset Area Community Park Capital Facilities 2011-2030 Project Title Total Cost (2011 Dollars) Sunset Park $1,900,000 Total Cost $1,900,000 Source: CFEMHill and ICF International. 2011. Sunset Area Community Planned Action NEPA/SEPA Environmental Impact Statement Final. April. (ICF 00593.10.) Bellevue and Seattle, WA. Prepared for City ofRenton and the Renton Housing Authority, Renton, WA. The funds for the Sunset Park facility are projected to come from a variety of sources, including various grant sources (federal, state, etc.), park impact fees, and developer contributions from within the planned action area. m-53 Attachment A ORDINANCE NO. 5612 JH-54 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 ATTACHMENT B AMENDMENTS TO TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT GOALS 1. Contribute to a balanced multi-modal transportation system through reasonable, planned, economically feasible arterial improvements that enhance HOV and transit operations, support adopted land use plans, protect or improve business access, and protect Renton's neighborhoods. 2. Maximize the use of transit in Renton by providing step-by-step, transit improvements to produce regionally linked and locally oriented transit services and facilities needed to serve travel demand generated by Renton residents and businesses. 3. Increase the person-carrying capacity of the Renton arterial system by the construction of improvements and the implementation of actions that facilitate the flow of HOVs into, out of, and through Renton. 4. Maintain, enhance, and increase pedestrian and bicycle travel by providing both safe and convenient routes and storage for the commuting and recreating public. 5. Encourage and facilitate the reduction of commute and other trips made via single occupant vehicles. 6. Create efficiently functioning air transportation facilities that are responsibly integrated with the City's transportation system and land use partem. 7. Maintain and improve truck and freight rail access to Renton industrial areas, and integrate freight transportation needs into Renton's multi-modal transportation system. 8. Develop a funding and implementation program for needed transportation improvements supporting adopted land use policies, that distributes transportation costs equitably between public agencies and private development. 9. Develop a transportation system that contributes to the attainment, and maintenance of regional air and water quality standards within the City of Renton, and complies with regional, state, and Federal air water quality standards, and preserves/protects natural resources. 10. Develop and maintain relationships between Renton and other agencies and local jurisdictions for cooperative planning of common transportation improvements, and discussion of transportation-related interests. XE-l Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 SUMMARY The Transportation Element of Renton's Comprehensive Plan serves several purposes. In addition to meeting the State Growth Management Act (GMA) requirements for a transportation element, it assists the City in coordinating transportation planning with land use planning and adequately serving existing and future residential and employment growth. The Transportation Element, sometimes called a Transportation Plan, also provides direction on coordinating the development of a multi-modal system, which is a system that accommodates various modes of transportation. Finally, the Transportation Element coordinates transportation projects with other relevant projects in adjacent jurisdictions and the region. This coordination is an important element in creating an effective system and in competing for transportation funding. The goal of the Renton Transportation Element is to provide "a balanced multi-modal transportation system that will support land use patterns, and adequately serve existing and future residential and employment growth within the City." (A multi-modal system is defined as one which provides various choices of transportation for the public such as automobiles, buses, rail, transit, bicycles, walking.) The main objective guiding the development of the Transportation Element is to be consistent with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Policies, the State's Growth Management Act, County-wide Planning Policies, and Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) legislation. Another key objective of the Transportation Element is to "coordinate land use and transportation planning.'' This is a requirement of the State's Growth Management Act. The Transportation Element must also be coordinated with the Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) VISION 2020 and Destination 2030 (the adopted long-range growth and transportation strategy for the Central Puget Sound area — King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish counties). A companion regional document is the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP), also produced by the PSRC, which specifically addresses regional transportation and how jurisdictional transportation plans fit within the regional context. This City of Renton Transportation Element is consistent with GMA, VISION 2020, Destination 2030, and the MTP. The Comprehensive Plan (and Transportation Element) was adopted on November 1, 2004. Subsequent transportation planning work and enactment of development regulations that are consistent with, and help implement, the adopted Comprehensive Plan and Transportation Element have resulted in the additional amendments to the Comprehensive Plan (and Transportation Element) since that time. The most recent amendments to this element occurred in March 2011 to incorporate transportation projects anticipated in the Sunset Area Community Planned Action EIS. As noted above, the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to create a desirable land use pattern and serve land uses with a multi-modal transportation system. This Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan comprises a set of framework transportation pohcies to support Renton's land use Vision and a more detailed and technical plan for implementation of the framework policies. The Transportation Element encompasses several chapters, including Street Network, Transit, High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV), Non-Motorized Transportation, Transportation Demand Management/Commute Trip Reduction (TDM/CTR), Airport, Freight, Financing and Implementation, Environmental and Natural Resources, and Intergovernmental Coordination. Some of the transportation policies apply to specific chapters; the policies compiled below apply to all of the chapters. XI-2 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 General Policies Policy T-1. Land use plans and regulations should be used to guide development of the Transportation Element for the City. Policy T-2. Transportation improvements should support land use plans. Policy T-3. Transportation plans should be phased concurrently with growth. Policy T-4. Adequate transportation facilities and services should be in place at the time of occupancy or an adopted strategy must be in place to provide those facilities within six years of the approval of new development. Policy T-5. Land use and transportation plans should be consistent so that land use and adjacent transportation facilities are compatible with each other. Land use capacity/forecast assumptions used in capacity/forecast modeling should be used in estimating travel demand. Policy T-6. Land use patterns should support transit and non-motorized modes of travel. Policy T-7. The disruptive impacts of traffic related to centers and employment areas should be reduced. XI-3 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 In this context, disruptive impacts are primarily traffic. They could be mitigated by implementing programs, such as transportation management programs implemented through cooperative agreements at the work place, flexible work hours, and/or sub-area planning policies supporting increased density. Increased land use densities and a balance of land use mixes in an urban setting will result in fewer and shorter vehicle trips. As people begin to live closer to employment and shopping, they will no longer need to drive to these facilities and they will be able to link trips, resulting in fewer vehicle trips. In addition to the Transportation-Land Use interaction, another issue that pervades several of the chapters of the Transportation Element is that of parking. The location and supply of parking is an integral part of the local transportation system. Inadequate parking can increase congestion on streets as people circle and hunt for available spaces. Too much parking is an inefficient use of land and can deter transit use. A proper balance needs to be achieved between parking supply and demand. Satellite parking and shuttle services and collective structured parking are potential methods for increasing the parking supply. Note: Any references in this document to downtown parking restrictions and/or removal apply only to commuter/employee parking and not to business patron/customer parking. Growth Management Act Requirements The Growth Management Act specifies the following minimum requirements for information that is to be included in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan: 1. Land use assumptions used in estimating travel; 2. Facilities and service needs, including: a. An inventory of air, water, and land transportation facilities and services, including transit routing, to define existing capital facilities and travel levels as a basis for future planning; b. Level of service standards for the transportation system to serve as a gauge to judge performance of the system. These standards should be regionally coordinated, and adopted Level of Service (LOS) policy and/or standards for state facilities shall be stated in local transportation plans. c. Specific actions and requirements for bringing into compliance any facilities or services that are below an established LQS standard; d. Forecasts of traffic for at least ten years based on the adopted land use plan to provide information on the location, timing, and capacity needs of future growth; e. Identification of system expansion needs and transportation system management needs to meet current and future demands; • 3. Demand Management Strategies 4. Finance, including: a. An analysis of funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources; b. A multi-year financing plan based on the needs identified in the comprehensive plan, the appropriate parts of which shall serve as the'basis for the six-year street, road, or transit program required by RCW 35.77.010 for cities; XI-4 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 c. If probable funding falls short of meeting identified needs, a discussion of how additional funding will be raised, or how land use assumptions will be reassessed to ensure that LOS standards will be met; 5. Intergovernmental coordination efforts, including an assessment of the impacts of the transportation plan and land use assumptions on the transportation systems of adjacent jurisdictions. STREET NETWORK Traffic generated by employment centers, regional pass-through traffic using local streets, and truck traffic all contribute to congestion and reduced accessibility within the City of Renton. In resolving traffic flow problems, a number of choices will need to be made. In some cases, increasing traffic flows only increase congestion on local streets or impact pedestrians, yet if traffic flows are reduced accessibility can be compromised. Alternately, if the local street system is efficient and not congested it will attract increased regional traffic. The objectives and policies in the Street Network chapter are intended to reduce the amount of traffic that has neither an origin nor destination in the City of Renton while at the same time providing reasonable levels of traffic flow and accessibility on the local street system. These objectives and policies also address issues related to the street network as a system, the physical design of individual roadways, traffic flow, and traffic operations control. The Street Network Chapter contains a detailed review of the City of Renton's street system - including existing functional classifications as well as a description of Renton's Arterial Plan. The Street Network Chapter also contains discussion of the Level of Service criteria used to judge performance of the system. (The service levels were developed in conjunction with King County adopted Level-of-Service Framework Policies and other local jurisdictions.) Objectives The Street Network Chapter is based on the following objective: Objective T-A: Create a comprehensive street system that provides reasonable vehicular circulation throughout the City while enhancing the safety and function of the local transportation system. Policies Policy T-8. Each street in the City should be assigned a functional classification based on factors ncluding traffic volumes, type of service provided, land use, and preservation of neighborhoods. Policy T-9. Streets and pedestrian paths in residential neighborhoods should be arranged as an interconnecting network that serves local traffic and facilitates pedestrian circulation. Policy T-10. Street vacations should be supported when: • The right-of-way to be vacated is not needed for future public use; • The right-of-way to be vacated is not needed for the interconnection of the roadway system; • The abutting property owners have demonstrated a need for the street vacation; and, • The resultant road configuration, after the street vacation, conforms to adopted City plans. XI-5 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B Policy T-ll. Street vacations should only be supported in Downtown and neighborhoods that have developed around a traditional grid system when the resultant road configuration after the street vacation does not significantly interrupt the function of the overall grid system. Policy T-12. Street standards should continue to be based on functional classification, land use objectives, and HOV/transit/non^motorized facility needs. (The street standards should be coordinated with the objectives and policies of the Community Design Element.) Policy T-13. A level of service should be maintained that: maximizes mobility by emphasizing transit and HOV improvements; is coordinated with level of service standards of adjacent jurisdictions; and meets State requirements under GMA and concurrency. Policy T-14. Traffic flow on and accessibility to arterial streets should be managed to maximize person- carrying capacity. Policy T-15. Provide a balance between protecting neighborhoods from increased through traffic while maintaining access to neighborhoods. Policy T-16. Street networks should connect through the development to existing streets, avoid "cul-de-sac" or dead end streets, and be arranged in a grid street pattern (or a flexible grid street system if there are environmental constraints). Policy T-17. Proactively work with the state and neighboring jurisdictions to provide capacity on regional transportation systems and to reduce regional traffic on local streets. Policy T-18. Develop strategies to reduce adverse traffic impacts on local areas, (areas of the City that require this type of intervention should be identified and addressed through the sub-area planning process, neighborhood plans, or traffic mitigation programs that are implemented through development review.) Policy T-19. Access management, such as restricting left turns and excessive use of driveways, should be coordinated with design standards and land use in order to enhance public safety and preserve traffic carrying capacity. (Also see related policies in the HOV, Transit, Non-motorized and Freight sections of this Element and of the Community Design Element.) Inventory of Existing Streets The existing street/highway system serving Renton is shown in Figure 1-1. The system includes two freeways: Interstate-405 and State Route-167 (the "Valley Freeway"). Interstate 405 provides connections to the Eastside and Snohomish County to the north, and to 1-5 and the Sea-Tac Airport area to the south. The Valley Freeway extends south from 1-405 to Kent, Auburn, and Puyallup. In addition to the freeways, Renton is served by several other state highways, including SR-900 (Sunset Boulevard), SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway), SR-515 (Benson Highway), and SR-167 (Pvainier Avenue). Each of these state highways are integral elements of Renton's internal arterial system. In addition, SR-900 provides external connections to Issaquah on the east and to the Boeing Field area and 1-5 on the west. SR- 169 connects Renton to SR-18 and southeast King County, SR-515 provides the main arterial connection to the unincorporated Soos Creek area, and the Raimer Avenue section of SR-167 connects Renton with south Seattle. XI-6 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-1 RENTON STREET/HIGHWAY SYSTEM AI-/ Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Six routes, 1-405, SR-167, SR-900, SR-169, SR-515, and SR-167, converge in central Renton within a half mile radius of each other. This close proximity results in a complex traffic flow, as regional and local trips interact within a relatively short distance. rd Other key arterials that tie together the Renton street system include Grady Way and S.W. 43 Street in the Valley, Talbot Road and Puget Drive in southeast Renton, Park Avenue and Park Drive, Logan Avenue, and Airport Way in Central Renton, and 3rd Street / 4 Street, Duvall, Union, and Edmonds Avenues in East Renton. These arterials, with numerous other arterial streets, link commercial, industrial, and residential neighborhoods to the freeways and state highways. Within neighborhoods, local access streets provide internal circulation and connections to the arterials. Street System Characteristics Physical and traffic control characteristics of the Renton street system, including the location of traffic signals and one-way streets, and the number of lanes on arterial street segments, are shown in Figure 1-2. Existing Street Functional Classifications The purpose of functional classifications is threefold: i) to identify appropriate uses for Renton streets, ii) to establish eligibility for road improvement funding from various sources, and iii) to define appropriate street design standards. The arterial street functional classifications specified by the City of Renton include "Principal Arterial," "Minor Arterial," and "Collector Arterial" classifications. The adopted classifications in Renton, and the surrounding annexation areas of unincorporated King County, and on several roadways in adjacent City of Newcastle are shown in Figure 1-3. "Principal Arterials" are streets and highways that connect major intra-city activity centers, have primarily high traffic volumes that travel at relatively fast vehicle speeds, and therefore, have less emphasis on land use access. Grady Way in south central Renton and N.E. 3Ti/4ih Street in East Renton are examples of principal arterials. "Minor Arterials" are streets that provide links between principal arterials and collector arterials, and carry moderately high traffic volumes at less vehicle speed than on principal arterials. These arterials also connect intra-city activity centers with some emphasis on land use access. Southwest 7th Street in west central Renton and Union Avenue in northeast Renton are examples of minor arterials. "Collector Arterials" are streets that distribute traffic between principal and minor arterials and local access streets. Collector arterials include streets that provide major traffic circulation with more emphasis on land use access within commercial and industrial areas, and residential neighborhoods. East Valley Road in southwest Renton and N.E. 12* Street in northeast Renton are examples of collector arterials. Local access streets include all public streets not classified as principal, minor, or collector arterials. Local access streets primarily provide direct access to abutting land uses and are to be designed to discourage use by through traffic. These streets are identified by default on Figure 1-3 and are not listed in the legend. Traffic Volumes and Forecasts Existing (2000) and forecasted 2022* traffic volumes have been analyzed to reflect: i) latest regional and Renton land use modifications ii) latest regional transportation plans, and Renton Arterial, HOV and transit plans; iii) latest Renton mode split assumptions; and, iv) refinements to the City of Renton transportation model. XI-8 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 *NOTE: Renton's transportation model utilizes regional land use data and trip tables provided by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) for the horizon years 2000 to 2020. For the 2022 traffic volume forecast, a linear growth rate was calculated (from 2000 to 2020) and then applied to the 2020 traffic volumes to obtain 2022 volume forecasts. Arterial Traffic Volumes In order to show the overall level and pattern of utilization of the Renton street/highway system, 2000 and 2022 daily two-way traffic volumes were compiled (see Figures 1-4 and 1-5). The 2022 volumes reflect a freeway/arterial network comprised of facilities existing in 2000 and the following arterial and HOV improvements which are assumed to be implemented by 2022. XI-9 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-2 ARTERIAL SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS XI-10 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B FIGURE 1-3 ARTERIAL SYSTEM FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS XI-11 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-4 2000 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES XI-12 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-5 2022 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES XI-13 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Arterial improvements: • Puget Drive Southeast - Benson Road to 116* Avenue Southeast • Southwest 27* /Strander Boulevard Connection - Oakesdale Avenue Southwest to SR-181 • Duvall Avenue Northeast - Sunset Boulevard to City Limits • Widen Bronson Way - South 2pd Street to Sunset Boulevard • Lake Washington Boulevard - Park Drive to Coulon Park • Oakesdale Avenue - Monster Road to SR-900 • South Grady Way/ Raimer Avenue South - Intersection Improvements • Northeast 44* Street - Ripley Lane to Lake Washington Boulevard N.E. • SR-167 / East Valley Road Off-Ramp • NE 3rd Street - Sunset Boulevard to Edmonds Avenue N.E. HOV improvements: • Full HOV interchange at 1-405 / Northeast 44th Street • Add HOV lanes on 1-5 - Seattle CBD to Tacoma • 1-405 HOV Direct Access at Park Drive or North 8* Street • Half or full HOV interchange at L405/Benson Road or Talbot Road (SR-515) and HOV lanes on SR-515 or Benson Road South from the new HOV interchange to Puget Drive • Half HOV interchange at SR-167/S.W. 27* Street and HOV lanes on S.W. 27* Street from SR- 167 to Oakesdale Avenue Southwest • HOV lanes or intersection queue jump on SR-169 - Sunset Boulevard to east city limits • HOV lanes or intersection queue jump on N.E. 3rd / N.E. 4* Street -1-405 to Monroe Avenue Northeast • Transit Lane -South Grady Way to South Third Street High-volume arterial corridors include Raimer Avenue and Airport Way, each with over 30,000 vehicles per day (vpd), and Renton Avenue,'North Park Drive-Sunset Boulevard. Northeast, Northeast 3rd Street/4* Street,. Talbot Road South, Southwest 43rd Street and South Grady Way-Main Avenue South, each carrying over 20,000 vpd (volume numbers in 2000). The forecasted 2022 volumes show significant increases over 2000 volumes. On major arterial corridors, volumes are forecasted to increase on the order of 40% - 100% over the 22-year period. The highest-volume arterial corridor in 2022 is Rainier Avenue, with forecasted daily volumes of 20,000—66,000 through Renton. Maple Valley Highway (SRI 69) also has forecasted volumes in excess of 40,000 vpd. Other high- volume arterials with forecasted volumes in excess of 30,000 vpd are listed below: South Grady Way rd ft Airport Way/Logan Avenue NE 3~ Street/NE 4~ Street North Park Drive/NE Sunset Boulevard Sunse| Boulevard North (west of 1-405)^ S/ 43L Street / South Carr Road/SE 176~~ Street/ Petrovitsky Road Traffic volumes on the freeway system are also forecasted to increase significantly by 2022, with daily volumes of over 200,000 on most segments of 1-405 and over 120,000 on SR-167 (Valley Freeway) through XI-14 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Renton. The forecasted 1-405 volumes are equivalent to current volumes on 1-5 at the Ship Canal Bridge, where 1-5 has eight mainline lanes plus four reversible roadway lanes (as compared to the two lanes plus an HOV lane in each direction on 1-405). The 1-405 Corridor is vital for regional connections between Renton and other Puget Sound cities and for the economic vitality of the city. At the same time, the traffic that overflows out of the corridor will severely impact the City's streets and neighborhood livability. Level of Service Policy Numerous jurisdictions define Level of Service (LOS) using the traditional Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1997). This LOS concept quantifies a motorist's degree of comfort as they travel through an intersection or along a roadway segment. The degree of comfort includes such factors as travel time, amount of stopped delay at intersections, impedance caused by other vehicles and safety. Six Levels of Service are defined using letter designations — A, B, C, D, E and F, with a LOS A representing the best operation conditions and LOS F the worst. LOS B represents stable flow with somewhat less comfort and convenience than does LOS A. At LOS C, comfort and convenience declines noticeably. At LOS D, speed and freedom to maneuver are restricted. At LOS E, speeds are low. Flow is relatively uniform flow, but there is little freedom to maneuver. Prior to 1995, the City of Renton policy was primarily focused toward improving roadway capacity for single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel. However, because of traffic congestion in the 1-405 and SR 167 corridors, traffic is overflowing off of these facilities onto congested arterials and diverting through Renton neighborhood streets. Trying to solve the problem solely through building facilities to improve roadway capacity only attracts more traffic onto Renton's streets. hi recognition of the regional nature of the traffic problems faced by Renton and the basic impossibility of building enough roadway capacity to alleviate traffic congestion, the City of Renton revised its LOS policy in 1995 to emphasize the movement of people, not just vehicles. The new LOS policy is based on three premises: • Level of Service (LOS) in Renton is primarily controlled by regional travel demands that must be solved by regional policies and plans; • It is neither economically nor environmentally sound to try to accommodate all desired single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel; and • The decision-makers for the region must provide alternatives to SOV travel. Renton's LOS policy is based on travel time contours which in turn are based on auto, transit, HOV, non- motorized, and transportation demand management/commute trip reduction measures. The LOS policy is designed to achieve several objectives: • Allow reasonable development to occur; • Encourage a regionally-linked, locally-oriented, dynamic transportation system; • Establish a LOS standard that meets requirements of the Growth Management Act and King County's adopted Level-of-Service Framework Policies; • Require developers to pay a fair share of transportation costs; and • Provide Renton flexibility to adjust its LOS policy if the region decides to lower regional LOS by not providing regional facilities. XI-15 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The City of Renton LOS standard is used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV and transit elements of the LOS standard are based on travel times and distance and are the primary indicators for concurrency. The non-motorized and TDM measures serve as credit toward meeting multi-modal goals of Renton and the region. Renton's LOS standard sets a travel time standard for the total average trip rather than single intersections, and it provides a multi-modal LOS standard that conforms with current regional and local policies requiring encouragement of multi-modal travel. The Renton LOS standard has been refined to provide a system for use in evaluating transportation plans. This process includes the following: • Determination of existing travel times within the City of Renton; • Calibration of the City of Renton traffic model to reflect existing SOV and HOV travel times; • Determination of future SOV and HOV travel times for the adopted Land Use (described in the Land Use Element) using the calibrated traffic model; • Development of transit travel times using indicators of transit access, intra-Renton travel time to regional system, and regional travel time; • Development of a city-wide LOS travel time standard (index) using the most recent existing travel time data; • Development of transit and HOV mode splits; • Development of a twenty-year LOS standard using the most recent travel time index as the standard; • Testing transportation plans using LOS policy and standard to gauge the performance of the local transportation system, including State-owned facilities; and • Selecting a plan that maintains the established LOS standard. Other elements of the LOS implementation process include: • Monitoring the area to re-validate transportation plans; • Adjusting transportation plans as needed to meet standards and/or address other environmental/coordination issues; and • Providing flexibility to modify the LOS standards over time (if needed). Level Of Service Standard A Citywide 2022 Level of Service standard has been developed for the City of Renton. The following demonstrates how Renton's LOS policy was used to arrive at the 2022 LOS standard. A 2002 LOS travel time index has been determined for the City by establishing the sum of the average 30- minute travel distance for SOV, HOV, and Transit as follows: 2002 Average PM peak travel distance in 30-minutes from the City in all directions SOV HOV 2 times Transit (includes access time) LOS Index 16.6 miles 18.7 miles 6.8 miles 42* * Rounded XT-16 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 As indicated in the above table: a single occupant vehicle (SOV) could expect in 2002 to travel approximately 17 miles in 30 minutes; a high occupant vehicle (HOV - carpool, vanpool) could expect to travel approximately 19 miles in 30 minutes; and a transit vehicle could expect to travel approximately 7 miles in 30 minutes. It should be noted that the transit index value takes into account the time to walk from the work site or residence to the bus stop and the time spent waiting for the bus to arrive. The initial value (3.4 miles in 2002) is then weighted by doubling it (to 6.8 miles) to recognize the advantage that the transit mode has over SOV and HOV modes in its passenger-carrying capacity. The 1990 LOS index of 49, and the basis for the 2010 LOS standard, presented in Renton's Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1995, was based on raw data collected prior to 1994. Subsequently in mid-1995, this raw data was updated using an enhanced Renton (1990-2010) transportation model, which resulted in a 1990 LOS index of 46. After calibration of a 2002 transportation model that reflects 2002 (and 2022) land use data and examining the raw data, the 2002 LOS index was found to be 42. This reduction in LOS index could be attributed to: i) reduced King County Metro transit service in Renton, especially in the Renton Valley area, as a result of regional funding constraints (e.g. passage of Initiative 695); ii) limited implementation of Sound Transit's planned express bus service and HOV direct access projects; and, iii) higher growth rate of vehicular traffic than anticipated for the period of 1990 - 2002. The 2002 LOS index is the basis for the 2022 standard. The average SOV 30-minute travel distance is forecast to decrease by 2022. SOV improvements alone will not maintain the 2002 LOS standard in 2022. A combination of HOV and/or transit improvements will need to be implemented to raise the HOV and/or transit equivalents to maintain the 2022 LOS standard. With the 2002 LOS index as a base, the City-wide 2022 LOS standard has been determined as follows: 2022 Average PM peak travel distance in 30-minutes from the City in all directions SOV HOV 2 times Transit (includes access time) LOS Standard 15* miles 17* miles 10* miles 42 * Rounded This standard will require that the travel time of SOV (15) + HOV (17) + 2 T (10) or the sum of these three modes (42) must be maintained in the year 2022 and intervening years. The improvements in the Transportation Plan Arterial, HOV, and Transit Sub-Elements that are designated for Renton have been tested against the above LOS standard to ensure that the Transportation Plan meets 2022 demands for traffic growth/land use development. To test against the LOS standard, the 2022 planned Arterial, HOV, and Transit improvements identified later in this Transportation Element are programmed into the 2022 Traffic Model. The Traffic Model then calculates the average travel speed for the SOV, HOV, and Transit* modes along specified travel routes (which have been broken into segments of known distance) including those routes that have been identified for improvements by the year 2022. The Traffic Model then converts the travel speed along known distances into travel distances in 30 minutes for each mode of travel. The 2022 standard is met if the sum of the SOV, HOV, and Transit travel distance indices equal 42. *Other factors are considered for calculating the transit LOS index including frequency of service and access time. Additional information describing the methodology for determining Renton's LOS standard is provided in the City of Renton Level of Service Documentation, September 1995. XI-17 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 LOS standards for ffighways of Statewide Significance (HSS) (i.e. 1-5,1-405, SR 167) have been adopted in 1998 by the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). For urban areas the adopted LOS standard is equivalent to the traditional LOS D. LOS standards for regionally significant state highways (non-HSS) in the Central Puget Sound region (i.e. SR-900, SR-169, SR-515) were adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) on October 30, 2003. For urban areas the adopted LOS standard ranges from LOS E/mitigated (pm peak hour LOS is below the traditional LOS E) to the traditional LOS D. (Further information on LOS standards for HSS and non-HSS facihties can be found on WSDOT and PSRC web sites, respectively.) Both Highways of Statewide Significance and regionally significant state highways are included in the inventory of all state-owned facilities within Renton's city limits. These state-owned facilities have been factored into Renton's modeling estimates of Renton's projected growth, and this local modeling estimate identifies how Renton's Comprehensive Plan land use and growth projections may impact state-owned facilities. These state-owned facilities are also included in Renton's city-wide travel-time based LOS standard, which is influenced by stopped delay at intersections and on roadway segments by impedance due to queuing vehicles. These same factors, as well as travel time, are elements of the traditional LOS concept (A through F). To maintain Renton's LOS standard Renton's Transportation Element has identified SOV, HOV, and transit-oriented improvements to state-owned facilities within Renton, as well as the local roadway system. Arterial Plan This Street Network Chapter includes an Arterial Plan developed to make reasonable SOV improvements in the City of Renton from 2002 to 2022. These arterial improvements are intended to enhance multi-modal corridor capacity on the Renton arterial system, and/or to provide new arterial and freeway connections as necessary to support the multi-modal concept. Also, the improvements comprised by the Arterial Plan have been identified through the land use and transportation planning process as improvements that protect or improve neighborhoods, improve safety, improve business access, and are economically feasible. The Renton Arterial Plan is shown in Figure 1-6. The improvements included in the Arterial Plan are listed in Table 1.1 and their location shown in Figure 1-7. The Arterial Plan (Figure 1-6) includes segments of several King County and City of Newcastle arterials. The list of arterial improvements includes several proposed King County improvements within the sphere of influence of Renton's Land Use Element. Also, several Tukwila, Kent, and Newcastle proposed improvements are included in the list in Table 1.1 due to their influence on the Renton arterial system. (These improvements have been compiled from the Tukwila, Kent, and Newcastle Transportation Improvement Programs and the King County Transportation Plan: Annual Transportation Needs Report.) The improvements listed on Table 1.1 are the arterial/freeway mitigation measures for the Land Use Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. These improvements, along with the Transit Plan and HOV improvements identified later in this document, provide a transportation plan that will meet the 2022 Level of Service standard and will be concurrent with land use development envisioned by 2022. XI-18 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-6 RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN XI-19 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TABLE 1.1 RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN 2002-2022 IMPROVEMENTS 1. Bronson Way - South 2nd Street to Park Avenue North 2. Garden Avenue North- North 8* Street to Park Drive North 3. CBD'Streetscape 4. Rainier Avenue - South 4th Place to South 7* Street 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19 A. 19B. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. Grady Way - Main Avenue to West City Limits Lind Avenue Southwest - Southwest 16th to Southwest 43rd Street NE 2nd and NE 6th Street - Duvall Avenue NE to 156* Avenue SE Duvall Avenue Northeast - Sunset Boulevard to North City Limits Oakesdale Avenue Southwest - Monster Road to SR-900 S.W. 27* Street / Strander Boulevard - SR-181 to Oakesdale Avenue Southwest Duvall Avenue NE- NE 8* Street to Sunset Boulevard Rainier Avenue -South 4* Place to South 2nd Street Puget Drive Southeast - Jones Place Southeast to Edmonds Avenue Southeast Benson Road - South 26* Street to South 31st Street Talbot Road - Southwest 43rd to South City Limits N.E. 3rd / N.E. 4* Corridor Improvements - Sunset Boulevard to East City Limits Mill Avenue South/Carr Road Lake Washington Boulevard. - Park Avenue North to Coulon Park Entrance Sunset Boulevard NE - Monroe Avenue NEN. to Duvall Avenue N.E. Sunset Area Community Road Improvements1 • Sunset Boulevard - NE Park Drive to Monroe Ave NE • NE 10* Street - Sunset Blvd to Harrington Ave NE • Sunset Lane - NE 10* Street to Harrington Ave NE • Sunset Area Green Connections • NE 12th Street/Edmonds Avenue • KB 12th Street/ Harrington Avenue May Creek Bridge Replacement South Renton Neighborhood Improvements N.E. 8* and NE 10* Street - Union Avenue N.E. to Duvall Avenue N.E. Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) -1-405 to East City Limits 156* Avenue SE- SE 134* Street to SE 136* Street 116* Avenue Southeast- Puget Drive SE to South 192nd street Carr Road/SE 176*/SE Petrovitsky- Lind Ave. SW to 116* Ave SE arterial improvements/bridge rehabilitation street improvements arterial widening/RR over crossing replacement arterial improvements arterial widening street improvements arterial widening arterial widening new arterial arterial widening arterial improvements arterial widening safety improvements/ arterial widening arterial widening arterial improvements intersection improvements arterial improvements safety/mobility improvements arterial improvements street improvements street extensions pedestrian/stormwater enhancements intersection improvements intersection improvements bridge replacement street improvements street improvements safety/mobility improvements arterial widening arterial improvements arterial improvements 1 These projects were analyzed for. the 2011-2030 timeframe as part of the Sunset Area Community Planned Action EIS. Portions of some of these projects may occur outside of the City's 2022 planning horizon. XI-20 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 27. Carr Road/Benson Road (SR 515) Intersection improvements OTHER JURISDICTION PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS TUKWILA: 28. West Valley Highway (SR 181)/South 156* Street 29.. West Valley Highway (SR 181) -1-405 to Strander Blvd. 30. Nelsen Place - South 156* to South 158* KENT: 31. South 196*/l 92nd Street Corridor (Phase III) - East Valley Highway to SR515 32. 80* Avenue South - South 196* to South 188* NEWCASTLE: 3 3. Coal Creek Parkway (Phase 2 and 3) SE 84* Way to SE 95* Street 34. Newcastle Way - 112* Avenue SE to 129* Avenue SE 35. Newcastle Way /116* Avenue SE 36. 112* Avenue SE - SE 64* Street to Newcastle Way 37. Not used 38. 112* Place SE - West City Limit to 116* Avenue SE KING COUNTY: 39. Duvall Avenue NE/Coal Creek Parkway - Renton City Limits to Newcastle City Limits (SE 95* Way) 40. South 192nd Street - SR-515 to 140* Avenue Southeast intersection improvements arterial improvements street improvements new arterial arterial widening arterial widening arterial widening intersection improvements arterial widening arterial improvements arterial widening arterial widening 41. 156* Ave SE/SE 142nd Place (City of Renton under recent annexations) 42. 154th Place SE/SE 142nd Place- Jones Road to 156* Avenue SE 43. 140* Avenue SE/SE Petrovitsky WSDOT (Limited Access): 44. 1-405 -1-5 to SR 167 45. 1-405 - SR 167 to North City Limits 46. SR 167-1-405 to SW 43rd Street 47. I-405/SR 167 Interchange • Southbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 • Northbound SR 167 to Northbound 1-405 • Northbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 intersection improvement arterial realignment/widening intersection improvements add one lane in each direction add two lanes in each direction add one lane in each direction construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp XI-21 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO, 5612 48. 1-405 between Lind Avenue SW and Talbot Road 49. I-405/SR 169 Interchange • SR 169/North 3rd" Street • Southbound 1-405 to Eastbound SR 169 50. I-405/Park Avenue N Interchange 51. I-405/N 30* Street Interchange 52. I-405/NE 44th Street Interchange WSDOT (City ROW) 53. SW 43rd Street - Lind Avenue S W to Talbot Road 54. East Valley Road - S W 16* to S W 34* Street 55. Lind Avenue SW - Grady Way to SW 16* Street 56. Talbot Road - South Renton Village Place to South 15* Place 57. Mill Avenue South - Houser Way to Bronson Way 5 8. Renton and Cedar Avenue Overpasses of 1-405 59. Sunset Boulevard - west of 1-405 60. Houser Way - north of North 4* Street to North 8* Street 61. Lake Washington Boulevard - north of NE 44* Street 62. Benson Road/I-405 Overpass POST 2022 IMPROVEMENTS RENTON: South Lake Washington Improvements • Logan Avenue North - North 4* Street to Garden Avenue North • North 10* Street - Logan Avenue North to Houser Way construct one-way frontage road in each direction with ramp connections to 1-405 at Lind and Talbot construct split- diamond interchange construct direct connection ramp reconstruct to accommodate 1-405 widening reconstruct to accommodate 1-405 widening reconstruct to accommodate 1-405 widening and future improvements arterial widening arterial realignment arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and 1-405 ramps arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and 1-405 ramps convert to one-way northbound realignment/revisions to accommodate 1-405 widening realignment/revisions to accommodate 1-405 widening realignment/revisions to -accommodate 1-405 widening realignment to accommodate 1-405 widening replacement to accommodate 1-405 widening arterial widening street widening XI-22 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 • Park Avenue North - Logan Avenue North to 1,200 feet north of Logan new street Avenue North North 4* Street - Logan Avenue North to Sunset Boulevard revise street network WSDOT (Limited Access): 1-405-1-5 to SR 167 . add one lane in each direction I-405/SR 167 Interchange • • Northbound SR 167 to Southbound 1-405 construct direct connection ramp East Valley Road at SW 34* Street construct new ramps connecting to SR 167 1-405 at North 10* Street construct direct connection ramps to and from the north 1-405 at SR 169 • Northbound 1-405 to Houser Way • Southbound Houser Way to Southbound 1-405 • Northbound SR 169 to Northbound 1-405 WSDOT (City ROW): Rainier Avenue - Grady Way to East Valley Road East Valley Road - SW 16* to SW 34* Street construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp realign roadway to connect to East Valley Road at SW 16* Street arterial widening XT-23 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 1-7 RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN IMPROVEMENTS XI-24 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B Included in Table 1.1 are arterial and freeway improvements that have been identified beyond 2022. These improvements will also be needed to support future land use and neighborhood and business goals and improve safety. Ongoing transportation planning work will include periodic testing of the 2002-2022 arterial and freeway improvements in Table 1.1 against the LOS standard. INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS Intelligent Transportation Systemts (ITS) is often defined as the application of technology to address transportation problems such as congestion, safety, and mobility. Within the Puget Sound region, substantial investments in ITS have been made by city and county departments of transportation and the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT). The City of Renton has completed construction of a Traffic Management Center (TMC), deployed a new centralized signal control system, and installed a video link to view WSDOT freeway cameras. As Renton's ITS program grows to include more technologies and expanded interagency coordination, the City of Renton has developed an ITS Master Plan that documents the City's ITS needs and provides direction for implementation of future ITS projects and programs Information describing ITS needs, potential projects and programs, costs and priorities is provided in the City of Renton Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Master Plan, Final Report, June 16, 2006. TRANSIT In the future, fewer new roads will be built to handle increased traffic. The challenge will be to better manage the existing transportation system and reduce traffic demand by encouraging the use of alternatives to single occupant vehicles. One of the most important of these alternatives is public transportation, or "transit." The Renton transit system, defined in this Transit Chapter of the Transportation Element, must provide attractive, convenient service for the local and regional travel needs of Renton businesses and residents. Objectives The Transit Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objectve T-B: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. Objective T-C: Ensure that a regional high-capacity transit system serves Renton. Objective T-D:Develop a transit system that conveniently connects the regional high-capacity transit system and local Renton residential areas, activity centers, and employment centers to the transit center. Objective T-E: Develop a local transit system that provides attractive, convenient service for intra-Renton travel. Objective T-F: Develop a transit circulation/distribution system that provides convenient connections between downtown and residential, employment, and other commercial areas within the Renton planning area. Objective T-G: Support methods of increasing transit accessibility to Commercial Corridor areas. Policies Policy T-20. The City should work with other jurisdictions in the greater metropolitan area to plan and provide frequent, coordinated and comprehensive bus service and transit facilities in all residential and employment areas. XI-25 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy T-21. Local and regional transit service and facilities should be planned and improved in cooperation with the regional transit authority. Policy T-22. Support routing of the citywide transit system to Commercial Corridor areas to provide greater access. Policy T-23. Encourage development proponents to work with the City Transportation Division, King County METRO, and Sound Transit in order to site transit stops within the Commercial Corridor areas. Policy T-24. Seek ways of improving speed and reliability of transit serving Renton's Downtown. Policy T-25. The City should take an active role in working with the regional transit agencies in planning and locating public transit facilities. Policy T-26. Transit should link the downtown with other parts of the Urban Center, other commercial activity areas, and the City's major employment areas to encourage use of the downtown by those employees both during and after work hours. Policy T-27. The multi-modal Transit Center in downtown Renton should be promoted as part of a regional high capacity transit system. Policy T-28. Both intercity and intra-city transit should be focused at the Renton Transit Center, the multi- modal transit facility located in the Downtown Core Area. Policy T-29. Future development and improvements in the Urban Center - Downtown should emphasize non- automobile oriented travel both to and within the downtown, while mamtairiing an adequate amount of parking for regional retail customers. Transit and parking programs should be integrated, balanced, and implemented concurrently. Policy T-30. Transit span of service should increase as Downtown Renton adds evening entertainment, dining, and recreation opportunities. Policy T-31. Public transportation transit stops should be safe, clean, comfortable, and attractive. Policy T-32. Parking serving the downtown Transit Center should be encouraged in parking structures. Policy T-33. Non-structured park-and-ride facilities should be located out of the Urban Center and feed into the downtown Transit Center. Policy T-34. Development of a regional network using new technology to move people and goods should be supported. Policy T-35. The City should support development of transit service connecting Renton to a regional rail network. Policy T-36. Criteria should be developed to locate park-and-ride lots serving residential areas. Policy T-37. Park-and-rides within the City of Renton's Urban Center and its Center Village designations should meet the following criteria: • . Use structured parking garages. • Be available for non-commuter use during evenings and weekends. • Be located within the immediate vicinity of the City's Transit Center, or any future major transit transfer facility (e.g., in Renton Highlands or South Lake Washington Neighborhood). Policy T-38. Surface park-and-rides located outside of the City's Urban Center should meet the following criteria: XI-26 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 • Be located in the vicinity of 1-405, SR-167, SR-900 east of 1-405, and/or SR-169. (These park-and-ride locations shall be chosen to provide convenient access for transit to those corridors while minimizing commuter pass-through traffic on Renton's street system.) • Be located in Commercial or Industrial designations within easy walking distance of employment, and/or multi-family uses. • Not be located within the Rainier Avenue corridor north of the I-405/SR-167 interchange. • Avoid consuming large areas of urban land for primary use parking lots. Policy T-39. Shared-use park-and-rides located anywhere within the City should meet the following criteria: • Be leased from existing, under-utilized parking spaces required per development standards for a primary use. • Not be expanded to accommodate leased park and rides. • Not be leased within the commercial area west of the Urban Center- Downtown bounded by SW 7* Street, Shattuck Avenue, Airport Way, and Hardie Avenue SW since cash flow resulting from a lease may be a disincentive for redevelopment of surface parking lots in this area. Policy T-40. Regional commercial uses should be linked by frequent and reliable mass transit to major employment and population centers. Also see related policies in: TDM/CTR Section; Land Use Element/Urban Center Section; and Community Design Element. The residential and centers policies of the land use plan also support transit through establishment of residential densities and a mix of residential and commercial uses in centers that can support public transportation. Specific treatment of the routes and stops for a transit system in downtown Renton are addressed in the Downtown policies of the land use plan. However, it is expected that such stops would serve commercial activity centers, which would complement the commercial and residential activities envisioned in the centers and residential policies of the land use plan. Existing Transit Service Bus service in Renton is currently provided by the King County Transit Division (Metro), the agency responsible for transit service in King County, and Sound Transit, the agency responsible for regional transit service. Figure 2-1 identifies the existing bus routes operating in Renton. A variety of Metro service is provided in the city ranging from internal Renton routes such as Route 110, the Renton "Rush " circulator route, to regional service to downtown Seattle and downtown Bellevue. Sound Transit's service includes express routes operating to SeaTac and Bellevue (Route 560), to Auburn and Bellevue (Route 564) and to Federal Way and Bellevue (Route 565). While not serving the city directly, Sound Transit's Sounder commuter rail service stops at the nearby Tukwila station. During weekday peak periods, Sounder trains currently serve several locations in Pierce County and South King County as well as downtown Seattle (King Street Station). The following provides an overview of the existing transit network serving Renton. Local Access The route structure and service headways for Renton routes provide basic overall service coverage. One of the local, community-oriented routes, Route 148, provides late evening and Sunday service. Route 105 provides evening service in the Highlands. Service connections in the Highlands area are reduced in the early evening periods; however, Route 240 provides evening and weekend service in the Highlands. In addition, Route 110, XT-27 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B which was intended to operate as a local circulator, is available only during the peak periods and includes service connection to the Tukwila commuter rail station. Eastside Connections Several Metro and Sound Transit routes provide connections to downtown Bellevue and other Eastside communities. These connections include Bellevue (non-downtown) and Factoria. Direct service is currently provided between Highlands and Factoria via Metro Route 240.. Route 240 provides 30-minute service during the day Monday through Saturday plus hourly service in the evenings. South King County Connections The baseline travel demand patterns indicate a substantial level of demand between Kent and various locations in Renton, particularly the Green River Valley. Renton and Kent have partnered with King County Metro to provide additional weekday service (Route 153) between downtown Renton and downtown Kent. East-West Connections Metro Route 140 currently connects Burien and Renton. Sound Transit Route 560 provides a connection between SeaTac and Renton. East-west connections to the Green River Valley area are particularly important given the current level of travel demand to this area from locations such as Tukwila and Burien. Route 111 provides service from the Lake Kathleen area via east Renton to downtown Seattle. The following routes serve a variety of markets: • Routes 101 and 106, Downtown • Route 240, Bellevue • Route 140, Burien, Sea-Tac Airport • Route 169, Kent • Route 148, Local Renton Downtown Renton Transit Center The Downtown Renton Transit Center is the hub of transit service in Renton. The Transit Center is served by regional and local service provided by Sound Transit and the King County Transit Division (Metro), and acts as both a destination and a major transfer center. The Downtown Renton Transit Center is located between South Second and South Third Streets on Burnett Avenue South and on a new connection between Logan Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South. The facility has been carefully integrated with other planned developments in the downtown area. Custom Bus Service King County Transit operates one custom bus route (952) serving Renton. This route operates four trips in the peak hour in the peak direction serving areas with significant employment density. Renton custom bus service originates at the Auburn Boeing plant, and serves Kent, Renton and terminates at the Everett Boeing plant. Park-and-Ride Facilities Renton has one dedicated transit park-and-ride lot facility within the city limits: the South Renton Park-and- Ride lot located at South Grady Way and Shattuck Avenue South. This park-and-ride lot has 370 spaces and is used at capacity. There are four park-and-ride lots in the Renton planning area which are leased by King County Transit for commuter parking. One of the lots is in downtown Renton, at the First Baptist Church at Southwest Sunset Boulevard and Hardie Avenue Southwest. It has 21 spaces and is used at 19% capacity. Another lot located in the Renton Highlands at Saint Matthew's Lutheran Church on Northeast 16th Street and Edmonds Avenue Northeast has 146 spaces and is at 29% capacity. A third lot is located at the East Renton Shopping Center at Southeast 128th Street and 164th Avenue Southeast, east of the Renton City limits in unincorporated King XT-28 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 County. This lot has 21 spaces and is at 29% capacity. The fourth leased lot, also located in unincorporated King County, is at the Nativity Lutheran Church at 140th Avenue Southeast and Southeast 177th Street. This lot has 25 spaces and is at 60% capacity. The Boeing Company has a park-and-ride lot located in the vicinity of North 6* Street and Garden Avenue North. This lot has a capacity of approximately 100 stalls. The City has leased 200 parking spaces in the downtown parking garage to King County Metro Transit as a park and ride facility. Utilization by communters is consistently 140 or more vehicles during a weekday. XI-29 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 XI-30 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Future Regional Accessibility The long range transit and rideshare service concept for the King County Transit Division (Metro) service area is described in the Long Range Policy Frameworkfor Public Transportation (adopted October, 1993). The Framework establishes policies that will guide future planning and development efforts, and it identifies possible policy implementation strategies. More specific near term transit improvements are outlined in the King County Transit Division's Six-Year Transit Development Plan for 2002-2007. On May 31, 1996 the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) approved a 10-year plan, Sound Move, which is illustrated in Figure 2-2: The Ten-Year Regional Transit System Plan. Voters approved a funding package to implement the plan on November 5, 1996. The approved Sound Transit Plan includes the following regional improvements: light rail transit, commuter rail transit, HOV expressway development, regional express bus service, and community connection improvements. Sound Transit improvements which will directly serve Renton include HOV access improvements, express bus service, and local connection improvements. In addition, commuter rail running between Seattle and Tacoma will stop at a station serving Renton and Tukwila, sited adjacent to the Boeing Longacres property. Efficient transit connections will be provided between the Downtown Renton Transit Center and the Commuter Rail Station. Sound Transit provides regional express bus service, with three routes serving Renton. As noted previously, express routes serve SeaTac, Bellevue, Auburn and Federal Way. To ensure quick access to the Downtown Renton Transit Center, the Sound Move plan identified direct access HOV ramps on 1-405 in the vicinity of North 8* Street and needed arterial HOV improvements in Renton to improve transit speed, reliability and ridership of transit services. Before constructing any arterial HOV improvements, Sound Transit will evaluate alternative improvements to benefit transit speed, reliability, and access. The City of Renton is coordinating with Sound Transit to ensure that commensurate transit service and improvements to improve transit speed, reliability and ridership in Renton will be provided should I-405/HOV direct access ramps not be implemented. Transit Plan Transit improvements are needed to provide the facilities and services necessary to support and encourage increased transit use and provide an alternative to single occupancy vehicle travel. The transit facilities and services outlined in the Transit Chapter of the Transportation Element are needed to provide adequate access between the regional transit system and Renton residential and employment areas, and to provide an attractive transit alternative for travel within Renton. As described in the previous section, an element of the regional system is the Seattle-Tacoma commuter rail line. Access to Renton is provided by a station located on the Renton-Tukwila border between Longacres Way and Strander Boulevard. This station is currently served by local bus transit and will additionally be served by local, and possibly regional, bus transit, including fast connections to the Downtown Renton Transit Center. XI-31 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 2-2 REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM *aF SOUNDTRANSIT RIDE THE WAVE XI-32 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Regional transit services are provided by the previously described Sound Transit express bus service, as well as by select King County Transit Division (Metro) express bus routes. The local transit system links neighborhoods and commercial centers with one another as well as to the regional transit system through connections to the Downtown Renton Transit Center. Local service is provided through a combination of services, including buses, shuttles, and Dial-a-Ride (DART) service. In addition, interceptor park-and-ride lots outside of downtown Renton should be developed close to trip origin locations, with transit service feeding the Transit Center and regional services. Renton has been and will continue to work with these transit agencies to assure that transit adequately serves Renton's developing residential areas. An illustration of Renton's 20-year transit plan is provided in Figure 2-3. This figure depicts planned regional and local improvements, and identifies at a conceptual level potential service types and transit routes. Specific transit service improvements and facilities identified for the next 6 years, and over the next 20 years to support Renton's conceptual transit plan, are described in the City of Renton Transit Needs Assessment as well as in the King County Transit Division's Six-Year Transit Development Plan for 2002-2007 and by the regional Sound Move program. The Transit Plan comprises a transit system that will serve Renton from 2002 to 2022, as a regional destination and as a city with commercial and neighborhood centers. It should also be noted that the exclusive freeway/arterial HOV facilities included in the HOV Chapter are needed to support and encourage increased transit use by improving transit travel times (by enabling buses to bypass or avoid the traffic congestion that is forecasted for the Renton and regional road systems). Level of Service The City of Renton Level of Service (LOS) policy emphasizes the movement of people, not just vehicles. This LOS policy is based on a set of multi-modal elements including auto, transit, HOV, non-motorized, and transportation demand management/commute trip reduction measures.. The LOS standard will be used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV, and transit measures will be based on travel time contours and will be the primary indicators for concurrency. The 2022 LOS standard has been established to greatly increase the competitiveness of transit compared to SOV travel. Achieving this goal has guided the planning and programming of the elements of the Transit Plan. Information on development of the transit index of the Level of Service Standard is provided in the City of Renton Level of Service Documentation. Ongoing transportation planning work will include continued refinement and updating of the transit index. XT-33 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 2-3 RENTON TRANSIT PLAN XJ.-34 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) In the future, fewer new roads will be built to handle increased traffic. A major challenge of the Renton Transportation Element will be to better manage the existing transportation system and reduce traffic demand by encouraging the use of alternatives to single-occupant vehicles. The HOV Chapter addresses this challenge by focusing on increasing the person-carrying capacity of the system rather than the vehicular capacity. Objectives The HOV Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objective T-H: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. Objective T-I: Develop HOV facilities on freeways and arterials to support and encourage ridesharing by enabling HOVs to bypass or avoid severe traffic congestion on Renton and regional street and highway networks. Objective T-J: Provide facilities to support attainment of Commute Trip Reduction and other Growth Management goals within the City. Policies Policy T-41. The City should support completion of a comprehensive system of HOV improvements and programs on state highways and regional arterials that give high-occupancy vehicles a travel time advantage over single-occupancy vehicles. Policy T-42. The City should continue to promote measures to increase the use of high occupancy vehicles among employers located within the City. Policy T-43. A continuous network of arterial HOV facilities (lanes, bypass, etc.) should be provided on the congested travel corridors in Renton. Policy T-44. Arterial HOV facilities should be provided on the local arterial routes in Renton that provide access to/from the regional highway system. Policy T-45. The City should establish or should encourage the establishment of arterial HOV system warrants, standards and criteria for usage (volume, capacity, LOS); physical and geometric characteristics; appropriate locations; time-of-day of operation; HOV facility type. Policy T-46. The City should support a regional vehicle occupancy monitoring and HOV system evaluation program that includes elements such as a "demonstration managed lanes" project, electronic tolling or "HOT LANES" concept. (Also see related policies in the TDM/CTR Section and see King County Countywide Planning Policies.) Existing HOV Facilities Freeway HOV facilities are provided on Interstate 405 and SR-167. These include inside (median) HOV lanes, both northbound and southbound, on 1-405 from the 1-5 interchange and continuing to the Renton north city limit and beyond. Two or more persons in a vehicle are allowed to travel in these lanes. These lanes are in effect 24 hours per day, except when non-HOV use is allowed between 7 pm and 5 am. Inside HOV lanes, both northbound and southbound, exist on SR-167 between the south Renton city limits and SR-405. This HOV facility is also designated for 2+ occupant vehicles. An HOV queue jump lane is provided at the following interchange ramps in Renton: the northbound SR-167 to northbound 1-405 ramp; the I-405/SR-169 (Maple Valley) northbound and southbound on-ramps; the I- XI-35 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 405/N.E. Park Drive northbound and southbound on-ramps; the I-405/N.E. 30th northbound on-ramp; and, the I-405/N.E. 44th southbound on-ramp. Each of the queue jump lanes has a 2+ designation. HOV Plan HOV facilities on SR-167 and 1-405 provide the freeway HOV system through Renton.. Additional regional HOV facilities (i.e., on 1-5) must be implemented by the State Department of Transportation in order to provide regional HOV service to the 1-405 and SR 167 corridors. To-date HOV lanes have been completed on 1-5 between the Seattle CBD and Puyallup and on SR 167 between 15* Street NW in Auburn and 1-405 in Renton. The City has identified arterial HOV corridors based on the policies listed previously. These corridors include many of the principal arterials through central Renton and state routes throughout the city. The Renton HOV Plan includes the provision (over the next 20 years (2002 to 2022) of the HOV facilities shown in Figure 3-1. The Plan includes HOV facilities, in the form of HOV lanes or intersection queue jumps, in the Renton corridors listed below: • Rainier Avenue / Airport Way • SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway) • Park Drive North / N.E. Sunset Boulevard • SR-515 or Benson Road • S.W. 27& Street XI-36 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B FIGURE 3-1 RENTON HOV PLAN XI-3 7 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 In addition to arterial HOV improvements, construction of direct access HOV interchange ramps to provide connections to the 1-405 HOV lane system is planned at N.E. 44* Street, N. 8th Street, and on the SR-167 system at S.W. 27* Street. These ramps will provide vital HOV access and enable efficient transit movements in the City to support regional and local transit service consistent with the objectives and policies described in the Transit Chapter of this Transportation Element. The HOV Plan also includes a transit corridor in Central Renton: S. 3rd/Burnett/ Logan/N. 6* comprise the northern portion ofthe corridor and in the southern portion Rainier Avenue, from South 3rd Street to South Grady Way completes the corridor. A north-south transit corridor is an important element of a transit plan that supports Renton's policies to: 1) encourage local and regional transit agencies to provide a high level of transit service to the Downtown Renton Transit Center by improving transit travel time, accessibility and reliability; and, 2) provide an attractive and effective alternative mode of transportation to the single occupant vehicle that contributes to a reduction in traffic congestion and air pollution in Renton's Urban Center. Also, the Strander Boulevard improvement identified in the Arterial Plan, Table 1.1, will serve transit vehicles as well as SOV and HOV traffic and is planned for implementation coordinated with the Renton/Tukwila commuter rail station. Several ofthe above HOV/transit improvements have been identified for funding under the regional Sound Transit plan approved by voters. Under this regional high capacity transit plan, Renton is designated to be served by the regional express bus system. Sound Transit has evaluated if there are capital facilities that could be constructed in Renton which would improve reliability and travel time for transit and HOV movement . sufficient to warrant Sound Transit's investment. Sound Transit has identified the Central Renton north-south transit corridor improvements and HOV direct access interchange improvements at North 8* Street as beneficial capital investments. The improvements in the Renton HOV Plan, along with improvements in the Arterial Plan and Transit Plan, provide a multi-modal transportation plan that meets the 2022 level of service standard for the projected travel demand from land use development envisioned by 2022. HOV improvements in the 1-405 corridor that have been identified beyond 2022 are listed below. These improvements would help to support future land use development. If these improvements were implemented by 2022 they could help maintain Renton's 2022 level of service standard. I-5/I-405 Interchange • _ Northbound 1-5 to Northbound 1-405 • Southbound 1-405 to Southbound 1-5 • Southbound 1-5 to Northbound 1-405 I-405/SR 167 Interchange • Northbound SR 167 to Southbound 1-405 • Northbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 1-405 at Tukwila Commuter Rail Station 1-405 at Rainier Avenue construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp construct half interchange construct half interchange Ongoing transportation planning work will include further analysis of the freeway interchange and arterial corridor HOV improvements identified in the HOV plan to verify physical, operational and financial needs and scheduling of implementation. This further study may find that the planned HOV improvements may not be feasible on one or more ofthe selected corridors. Therefore, ongoing work will also include the examination of additional arterial corridors for HOV treatment on an as-needed basis (without over-developing or over- using this type of transportation facility). Over-development of HOV facilities can lead to under-utilization and HOV traffic dispersion, rather than consolidation. XI-3 8 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Level of Service As discussed in the Arterial Chapter, the City of Renton LOS policy emphasizes the movement of people, not just vehicles. This LOS policy is based on a set of multi-modal elements including auto, transit, HOV, non- motorized, and transportation demand management/commute trip reduction measures. The LOS standard will be used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV, and transit measures of this LOS standard will be based on travel times and distance and will be the primary indicators for concurrency. HOV improvements along with transit improvements should show great effectiveness in improving 2022 travel times and distance. Achieving this goal will guide the planning and programming ofthe elements ofthe HOV Plan. Further information on how the HOV index of the Level of Service Standard was established is provided in the City of Renton Level of Service Support Document. XI-3 9 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION The non-motorized component of the City's Transportation Plan is designed to enhance the quality of urban life in Renton, to improve walking and bicycling safety, and to support the pedestrian and bicycle transportation modes as alternatives to the use of automobiles. The plan recognizes that non-motorized facilities along roadways and trails may serve multiple functions, including commuting and recreation. The on-street elements are specified in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Program and as described later in this section. Off-street elements of the non-motorized transportation system are specified by the City of Renton Long Range Parks, Recreation Open Space and Trails Master Plan described in the Parks Element. 1. Renton's existing transportation system is oriented towards accommodating cars, trucks, and buses rather than pedestrians or bicycles. The intent of the objectives and policies that follow is to provide guidelines for reevaluating the existing system and providing a better environment for walking and bicycling. Overall, pedestrian facilities throughout the City are intended to be upgraded. 2. More facilities are also needed for bicycle storage and parking in shopping areas, employment centers and in public places. 3. A better pedestrian network can be encouraged by creating an interconnected street system, developed to street standards, which include adequate walkways and street crossings. Traffic sanctuary islands and midblock crossings across busy arterials are also useful methods of improving the pedestrian environment. Objectives The Non-Motorized Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objective T-K: Improve the non-motorized transportation system for both internal circulation and linkages to regional travel. Objective T-L: Develop and maintain comprehensive trails system which provides non-motorized access throughout the City, maximizes public access to open space areas, and provides increased recreational opportunities for the public. Objective T-M: Integrate Renton's non-motorized transportation needs into a comprehensive transportation system serving both local and regional users. Objective T-N: Enhance and improve the non-motorized circulation system to, from, and within the City. Objective T-O: Develop and designate appropriate pedestrian and bicycle commuter routes along existing minor arterial and collector arterial corridors. Objective T-P: Improve the City's pedestrian and bicycle network to increase access to and circulation wilhin the Urban Center - Downtown. Policies Policy T-47. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic should be accommodated within all areas of the City. Policy T-48. Where right-of-way is available and bicycle demand justifies them, bicycle lanes should be marked and signed to accommodate larger volumes of bicycle traffic on select streets designated by the City. XI-40 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B Policy T-49. Pedestrian and bicycle movement across arterial intersections should be enhanced. Policy T-50. Obstructions and conflicts that restrict pedestrian movement should be minimized on sidewalks, paths and other pedestrian areas. Policy T-51. Convenient and safe pedestrian and bicycle access should be provided to and at the downtown Transit Center and all transit stops. Policy T-52. Bicycle storage facilities and parking should be encouraged within development projects, in commercial areas and in parks. Policy T-53. Secure bicycle parking facilities, such as bike lockers and bike racks should be provided at residential, commercial, and public establishments to encourage bicycle use. Policy T-54. Streets and pedestrian paths in residential neighborhoods should be arranged as an interconnecting network and should connect to other streets. Policy T-55. Pedestrian spaces should be emphasized and connected throughout the downtown. Policy T-56. Pedestrians should be given priority use of sidewalks within the Urban Center - Downtown designated pedestrian areas. Policy T-57. New pedestrian facilities should be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and existing facilities should be upgraded to improve accessibility. Policy T-58. Non-motorized transportation should be developed in tandem with motorized transportation systems, recognizing issues such as safety, user diversity, and experiential diversity. Policy T-59. Recognize the diversity of transportation modes and trip purposes ofthe following four groups: pedestrians, bicyclists, joggers and runners. Policy T-60. Foot/bicycle separation should be provided wherever possible; however, where conflict occurs, foot traffic should be given preference. Policy T-6C Adequate separation between non-motorized and motorized traffic should be provided to ensure safety. Policy T-62. The adopted Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan should be coordinated with and be an integral component ofthe City's on-going transportation planning activities. Policy T-63. Appropriate mitigation measures should be taken to address impacts on the City's transportation infrastructure. Contributions to the City's non-motorized circulation system will help alleviate such impacts. Policy T-64. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities should be promoted not only as a viable means of transportation, but as an important method for mamtaining overall health and fitness of Renton's citizens. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The City's existing non-motorized transportation system is comprised primarily of roadside sidewalks. Pedestrians have the exclusive use of sidewalks within business districts and have shared use with cyclists in other areas ofthe city. Although the City Code requires that sidewalks be provided on all streets, many of the public streets were constructed before the existing code was enacted, and as a result, numerous roadways are currently without XI-41 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B sidewalks. Streets needing sidewalks include both local and arterial roadways. The City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study addresses the sidewalks and walkways within the City. This report identifies a priority roster to construct "missing" sidewalk/walkway sections throughout the City. The priority evaluation system is based on four sidewalk users: 1) school children, 2) elderly persons, 3) transit riders, and 4) all other users. Except within business districts, cyclists may use existing sidewalks, provided that they yield the right-of- way to pedestrians. As of 2006, Renton has a combined bicycle/pedestrian facility along Garden Avenue North (North 6th Street to North 8ft Street) and North 8* Street (Garden Avenue North to Houser Way), and striped bicycle lanes on Southwest 16th Street (Oakesdale Avenue Southwest to Longacres Drive), on Oakesdale Avenue Southwest (SW 16* Street to SW 27* Street) on Duvall Avenue NE (NE 4* Street to NE 8* Street), and on NE 4th Street (east of Duvall Avenue NE). Renton is located at the crossroads of a regional system of existing and proposed trails. Existing trails within the City include the Cedar River Trail System and a portion ofthe Lake Washington Loop Trail. Regional Systems with proposed access to the City include the Green River Trail and the Interurban Trail. Figure 4-1 shows the existing (2006) non-motorized facilities within Renton and the nearby regional routes. Xl-42 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 4-1 EXISTING NON-MOTORIZED FACILITIES XI-43 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Design criteria for walkways, trails, and bikeways are contained in a variety of documents, including the City of Renton Municipal Code and Trails Master Plan, King County Road Standards, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, and Federal Highway Administration Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (the MUTCD). Neighborhood and Regional Access The principal non-motorized facility type linking neighborhoods within Renton and providing regional access are sidewalks or walkways. These facilities provide safe non-motorized mobility for both pedestrians and cyclists outside of business districts. Within business districts, sidewalks provide safe mobility for pedestrians. Currently, the sidewalks that exist along most of the arterials within the City provide the primary regional link as well. This "regional" access includes non-contiguous areas within Renton as well as areas outside of the City planning area. Some notable walkway deficiencies exist along sections of Maple Valley Highway (SR-169), Puget Drive, and Talbot Road South. These roadways do not currently provide safe non- motorized mobility through Renton. Installation of walkways/sidewalks has been either programmed into future transportation improvement projects, or identified in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study. Non-motorized neighborhood connections are made via sidewalks along arterial and collector roadways. Sidewalk connections between most neighborhoods within the City limits currently exist. In some locations, however, sidewalks are not continuous along a roadway. In potential annexation areas that are or were defined as "rural" by King County, sidewalks have generally not been constructed along either arterial or local roadways, because sidewalks are not required by rural area design standards. Most existing county roadways have either paved or gravel shoulders for use by cyclists and pedestrians. Consequently, many ofthe potential annexation areas do not provide protected non-motorized inter-neighborhood connection. Another important consideration is the bicycle route connection to regional cycling corridors. The regional corridors, to which the Renton bicycle routes should connect, include the Interurban, Christensen/Green River, Lake Washington Loop, Sammamish, and Soos Creek Trails. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plan The City, per the Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study, will construct sidewalks/walkways at "missing locations." In some areas, sidewalks will be constructed along each side of the street. Because of physical constraints such as side slopes and roadway grades, or minimal expected pedestrian usage, some locations will have pedestrian/cyclist facilities constructed on only one side of the street. Sidewalk facilities will be constructed as part of a prioritized installation program. Additional non-motorized facilities will be constructed in conjunction with roadway improvement projects and as part ofthe Transit Improvement Program. Current annexation area roadways without sidewalks will be added to the Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study after annexation into the City. Sidewalk improvements on roadways could be improved through local improvement district (LID) and capital improvement projects (CD?). Table 4.1 lists routes that have been identified as important bicycle transportation elements. Along roadways designated as bicycle routes, roadway or shoulder widening may accommodate cyclists' needs. These improvements could be added when roadway improvement projects are constructed or implemented as individual improvement projects. XI-44 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B Further review by the City of Renton, in cooperation with citizen groups, will be necessary to determine which ofthe projects listed in Table 4.1 are selected for development. King County is pursuing development of bicycle facilities outside ofthe Renton city limits. Three routes leading into Renton have been identified in the King County Non-motorized Plan: • 140 Place/Avenue Southeast (Southeast 192" Street to Southeast Renton-Maple Valley Road) . State Route 900 (13 8_ Avenue Southeast (Duvall Avenue Northeast) to Southeast 82 Street) • Coal Creek Parkway Southeast (Newcastle City Limits to Renton City Limits) The routes identified by the City of Renton and listed in Table 4.1 will be planned to connect with these proposed King County facilities. The City of Renton Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan identified in the Parks Element provides an in-depth description of proposed walking, bicycle, and mixed-use trails. By nature, these types of trails are primarily used for recreational purposes, and are not necessarily supportive of transportation goals. The creation of these trails would certainly supplement the City's non-motorized transportation system, and their development by the Parks Department should be encouraged. Routes that are found to be important transportation elements could be constructed through the transportation program. XI-45 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TABLE 4.1 PROPOSED BICYCLE ROUTES Facility Name Route Sunset Bypass Route Northeast 17* Street (Duvall Avenue Northeast to Union Avenue Northeast) Union Avenue Northeast (Northeast 17* Street to Northeast 12* Street) Northeast 12* Street or NE 10* Street (Union Avenue Northeast to Edmonds Avenue Northeast) Edmonds Avenue Northeast (Northeast 12* /10th Street to Northeast Park Drive) Northeast Park Drive (Edmonds Avenue Northeast to Lake Washington Boulevard North) Monroe Avenue Northeast Monroe Avenue Northeast (Northeast 4* Street to Northeast 12* Street) Duvall Avenue Northeast Duvall Avenue Northeast (Northeast 10* Street to Northeast 24* Street) Lake Washington Boulevard (Lk Washington Loop Route) Lake Washington Boulevard (Northeast 44* Street to Coulon Park) (Partially completed) Garden (Lk Washington Loop Route) Houser Way North (Lake Washington Boulevard to North 8* Street) Garden Avenue North (North 6* Street to Bronson Way) Central Renton Connection (Lk Washmgton Loop Route) Garden Avenue/North 6* Street to Airport Perimeter Road (Various routes under consideration). Burnett Burnett Avenue South (Cedar River Trail to Southwest 7* Street) Airport (Lk Washington Loop Route) Airport Perimeter Road corridor (Logan Avenue North to Rainier Avenue) Rainier Avenue North (Airport Perimeter Road to Northwest 3rd Street) Hardie/Rainier Bypass Northwest 3rd (Rainier Avenue North to Hardie Avenue Northwest) Hardie Avenue (Northwest 3rd Street to Southwest 7* Street) Southwest 7* Southwest 7* Street (Burnett to Oakesdale) Southwest 16th Lind Avenue Southwest (Southwest 7* Street to Southwest 16* Street) Southwest 16* Street (Lind Avenue Southwest to Raymond Avenue Southwest) Southeast Area Main Avenue (Bronson Way to Benson Road South) Benson Road South (Main Avenue South to Southeast 168* Street) Puget Drive Southeast (Benson Road South to Edmonds Avenue Southeast) Edmonds Avenue Southeast (Puget Drive Southeast to South 157* Street) Strander Boulevard/Southwest 27* Street Springbrook Wetlands Trail to Interurban Trail Sunset Boulevard (West) Hardie Avenue Southwest to West City Limits Talbot Road South 7* Street to South City Limits Northeast 3rd/Northeast 4* Street Sunset Boulevard North to East City Limits Edmonds Avenue SE/SE 116* Avenue Southeast Puget Drive to Southeast 192nd Street XI-46 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT/ COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION (TDM/CTR) As stated in the Arterial, Transit, and HOV Chapters, a major challenge of the Renton Transportation Plan will be to better manage the existing transportation system and reduce traffic demand by encouraging the use of alternatives to single occupant vehicles. The Transportation Demand Management/Commute Trip Reduction (TDM/CTR) Chapter addresses this challenge by focusing on encouraging and facilitating reductions in trip- making, dispersion of peak period travel demand throughout the day, increased transit usage, and increased ride sharing. In enacting the Washington State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law of 1991, the 1997 amendments, and the 2006 CTR Efficiency Act, the State Legislature found that decreasing the demand for vehicle trips is significantly less costly and at least as effective in reducing traffic congestion and its impacts as constructing new transportation facilities, such as roads and bridges, to accommodate increased traffic volumes. The legislature further found that reducing the number of commute trips to work made via single occupant cars and light trucks is an effective way of reducing automobile-related air pollution, traffic congestion and energy use. The goals, objectives, and policies ofthe Transportation Demand Management/Commute Trip Reduction Chapter also are based on these findings. Objectives The Transportation Demand Management/Commute Trip Reduction Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objective T-Q: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single occupancy vehicles. Objective T-R: Promote a reasonable balance between parking supply and parking demand. Policies This Chapter of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan contains City policies concerning Transportation Demand Management and Commute Trip Reduction (including support for ride sharing and management of parking supply). Policy T-65. The disruptive impacts of traffic related to centers and employment areas should be reduced. (In this context, disruptive impacts are primarily traffic. They could be mitigated through techniques such as transportation management programs implemented through cooperative agreements at the work place, flexible work hours, and Community planning.) Policy T-66. Appropriate parking ratios should be developed that take into account existing parking supply, land use intensity, and transit and ride-sharing goals. Policy T-67. Alternatives to on-street or on-site parking should be explored. Policy T-68. Site selection criteria should be developed for location of park-and-ride lots serving residential areas. Policy T-69. The construction of parking structures in downtown Renton should be encouraged. Policy T-70. Parking ratios should be reduced as transit services are increased and an adequate level of public transit can be demonstrated. Policy T-71. Transportation demand management measures should be implemented at residential and retail developments, as well as at the workplace. XI-47 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy T-72. Employers affected by Commute Trip Reduction laws should be encouraged to implement measures that support reductions in SOV travel and vehicle miles traveled. Policy T-73. Site design and layout for all types of development should incorporate transportation demand management measures such as convenient priority parking places for HOVs, and convenient, direct pedestrian access from residential, commercial, and other facilities to transit stops/stations. Strategy T-51.1 Downtown (Central Business District) parking restrictions and/or removal resulting from TDM/CTR policies shall apply to commuter/employee parking, not to business patron/customer parking. Also see related policies in the HOV section. Existing Parking Supply and Demand An inventory of the existing parking supply in the Downtown Core was conducted in 2001. The inventory gathered data for both on-street and off-street spaces. Figure 5.1 summarizes the results ofthe inventory. The Downtown Core has 2,055 off-street spaces. There are also 387 public off-street parking spaces within the Downtown Core. The remaining off-street parking spaces are private or signed for use by patrons of a specific business. Additional information on this parking inventory is provided in the Parking in Renton's Downtown Core report. Ongoing transportation planning work will include expanding the parking study area, possibly citywide, if needed for the refinement of parking policies and guidelines. XI-48 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B FIGURE 5-1 DOWNTOWN CORE EXISTING PARKING SUMMARY 2001 Downtown Core Existing Parking Summary 2001 2055 Off-S*eet Parting On-Street Partang 24X2 Total ParWofl Spaces XI-49 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Parking Policy Review As stated in the Washington State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) law of 1991, there exists a close relationship between commuter behavior and the supply and cost of parking. As required by the CTR law, the City has completed a review of local parking policies and ordinances as they relate to employers and major worksites and revisions necessary to comply with commute trip reduction goals and guidelines. Maximum parking ratios have been established, and the existing minimums modified in the City's Development Regulations, to create a range of appropriate allowable parking ratios. Additional revisions have been made to support HOV, transit, and non-motorized usage and access. TDM/CTR Programs The City has adopted a CTR Ordinance and a CTR Plan (February 1993). The ordinance outlines the manner in which and the schedule with which affected employers located within the City of Renton are required to design and implement commute trip reduction programs at their worksites. As of February 2007, there are 22 active CTR sites in Renton (Figure 5-2). In compliance with the 2006 CTR Efficiency Act, the City has amended the CTR Ordinance and CTR Plan adopted in 1993. The CTR Plan is a summary document that describes the City's implementation approach. As stated in the Plan, the City has contracted with Metro to perform certain activities, including employer notification, employer assistance, and program review. The Plan summarizes the CTR goals and targets by 2011 a 10% reduction in sigle-occupant vehicles (SOV) and a 13% reduction in vehicle miles traveled (vmt). It explains the circumstances and procedures for employer appeals of CTR program administrative decisions. The Plan also states the City's commitment to implementing a CTR program for its own employees, to complete the parking policy review mentioned above, and to report on an annual basis to the state regarding progress towards meeting CTR goals. In the past, the City, with the support of Metro, has developed Transportation Management Programs (TMPs) for new residential, commercial, and office developments. These TMPs have usually been put in place through SEPA agreements. At some point in the future, the City may consider adopting a developer- XI-50 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B FIGURE 5-2 RENTON ACTIVE CTR SITES LEGEND Bus Routes wflh aft-day service Bus Routes with peak onty service Active CTR Stte ID Renton (with Map ID) and percent of employee Transit Use _ Stops wShin a Quarter Mile of Renlm 9 Active CTR Sites 2 srm MAP ID CTR ID COMPANY KAMF 1. E87460 * Honeywell 2. E80384 E R Solufibns 3. E80663 U.S. Government 4. E80697 \faliey Medical Center 5. E80721 Paccar Parts 6. E80747 Paccar ITD 7. E80762 King County Government B. EB1794 City of Renton 9. E83097 Kenworth Truck Company 10. E84749 The Boeing Company 11. EB4764 The Boeing Company 12. EB4772 The Boeing Company 13. EB5399 The Boeing Company 14. E854S8 Wizards of the Coast 15. E86561 King County Government 16. E87007' Hunter Douglas 17. E87304 The Boeing Company 18. E88229 Cummins Northwest 19. E8B500 Cutter & Buck inc 20. E89433 Classmates.com 21. E8S730 Renton Technical College 22. E99442 Microscan Systems, Inc RENTON - Active CTR Sites XI-51 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 based Transportation Demand Management ordinance (with site design and other requirements) to complement the employer-based CTR ordinance and its employer worksite requirements. Parking Management Regulations Parking regulations are specified in Section 4-4-080 ofthe Renton Municipal Code. The regulations include requirements for new construction of parking including landscaping, screening, layout, paving, markings, and wheel stops. They also include requirements for size and amount of parking according to the land use activity involved. Ongoing transportation planning work will include refinement of criteria for locating park and ride lots serving residential areas to address factors such as the intensity of development in adjacent areas, the level of traffic congestion in the areas, proximity to arterial streets, and opportunities to buffer lots from living areas . Standards for construction of parking garages will be reviewed to address minimization of land area and the amount of impervious surface. Also, the city will be working with WSDOT, Puget Sound regional council, King county, Metro Transit and others to develop rules andcreate new plans to implement the CTR Efficiency Act adopted by theWashginton state Legislature in 2006. The CTR Efficiency Act includes changes to the CTR law to make the program more effective, efficient, and targeted. The modified CTR program will officially start on January 1, 2008. AIRPORT Renton's Airport is more than a transportation facility. It is also a vital element to Renton's commercial and industrial economy, providing aircraft services, manufacturing support, flight training, and other airport activities. The Airport Chapter of the Renton Transportation Element is implemented by the 2002 Airport Business Plan and the Airport Master Plan for the Renton Municipal Airport. The intent ofthe objectives and policies is to support increased aviation activities and appropriate mitigation of adverse impacts when possible. (See also the Airport Compatible Land Use section of the Land Use Element.) Objectives The Airport Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objective T-S: Promote and develop local air transportation facilities in a responsible and efficient manner and recognize the Renton Municipal Airport as a unique, valuable, and long-standing public transportation facility within the region. Objective T-T: Maximize available space on the airport site for uses that require direct access to taxiways and runways such as storage and parking of aircraft and aircraft maintenance and service facilities. Objective T-U: Continue operation ofthe Airport as a Landing Rights Airport, ultimately providing permanent inspection facilities to the U.S. Customs Service. Policies Policy T-74. Support the land base and seaplane base activities. Acknowledge that there are certain costs to the community associated with the existence of the Renton Municipal Airport, such as noise generation, but recognize that these costs have historically been accepted by the community in exchange for the economic and transportation-related benefits and the civic prestige that are also associated with the airport. Policy T-75. Promote and develop airport facilities and services for all wheeled and float-equipped aircraft, owners, pilots, and passengers in a manner that maximizes safety, efficiency, and opportunity for use. XI-52 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy T-76. Lease airport property for aviation-related uses that create jobs and expand the City's tax base. Policy T-77. The Renton Municipal Airport provides the only publicly-owned seaplane facility in the area and, therefore, the northern shoreline of the airport should be restricted to seaplane access. Policy T-78. Develop appropriate land use plans and regulations for structures and vegetation within the airport's runway approach zone. (See Airport section of the Land Use Element, Objectives LU-E, LU-F, LU-G and Policies LU-19 - LU-30.) Airport Facilities The Renton Municipal Airport is a major general aviation airport in the Puget Sound area. The Renton Municipal Airport is formally designated as a Reliever Airport in the Federal Aviation Administration's National Plan of Integrated Airport Systems and the Puget Sound Regional Council's Regional Airport System Plan. The airport is owned by the City of Renton and is located in the northwest comer of the city, bounded generally on the east by the Cedar River, on the west by Rainier Avenue North, on the south by Airport Way, and on the north by Lake Washington (see Figure 1.1). The Airport consists of approximately 165.46 acres. It is oblong in shape, and has one runway with two parallel taxiways with concrete and blacktop surfaces and surface water drainage. The runway, running southeast to northwest, is 5,379 feet long and 200 feet wide, with a 340-foot displaced threshold at the south end. It is equipped with medium intensity runway lighting, runway, end identification lighting (REEL), and precision approach path indicators (PAPI). Taxiways are lighted, and there is a rotating beacon, a windsock, and a non-directional radio beacon. The Federal Aviation Administration operates a contracted Air Traffic Control Tower during the hours of 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. May 1 through September 30 and from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. October 1 through April 30. Approximately 115,000 landings and take-offs per year take place at the Airport, making it the seventh busiest airport in the State of Washington. Contiguous to the Renton Airport is the Will Rogers-Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base. Landings and take-offs from the water are not recorded, but during the summer months the seaplane base is one of the busiest in the Northwest. Airport Activities The Renton Airport serves general aviation demand generated by Renton, as well as by other communities generally within a 30-minute driving time (e.g. Bellevue to the north, Issaquah to the east, Kent to the south, and Seattle to the northwest). The concept of "general aviation" includes all aviation uses except scheduled commercial passenger airline servicesand military operations. Consequently, nearly all ofthe aviation operations at Renton Airport are those of general aviation, including the flights of the transport-class aircraft produced by the adjacent Boeing plant. General aviation uses are both personal and revenue- producing, the latter category including business, charter, and flight instruction. The seaplane base provides facihties only for small general aviation types of aircraft (both personal and revenue-producing). Aircraft services available at the Airport include aircraft maintenance and service, fuel, flight instruction, aircraft charter and rental, and aircraft storage, both hangared and open. Fixed base operators (FBO's), which are aviation-oriented businesses offering a variety of services and products to aircraft owners and operators, provide these services to the aviation public. XI-53 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Airport Master Plan and Renton Municipal Airport Business Plan 1997 Airport Master Plan Update A 1997 update to the original 1978 Master Plan was approved by the City Council in August 1997. A primary purpose of the 1997 update was to determine the existing and future role ofthe airport and to provide the City with information and direction in the future planning and continued development of the airport. The objective ofthe study was to develop a plan for providing the necessary facilities to best accommodate the aviation needs of the airport and contiguous seaplane base over the next twenty years. The study work scope consisted of inventories, forecasts of aviation demand, demand/capacity analyses, facility requirements, airport layout plans and land use plans, development staging and costs, financial plans, and an environmental impact assessment report. The Airport Master Plan is updated as necessary to reflect progress and changes from the original Master Plan. The 1997 Airport Master Plan should be updated in 2005 or 2006 as many of the recommendations from the 1997 Airport Master Plan have been implemented. The'remaining recommendations should be re-evaluated in the next update of the Airport Master Plan as conditions have changed. 2002 Renton Municipal Airport Business Plan The 2002 Renton Municipal Airport Business Plan was prepared at the direction ofthe Renton City Council. The purpose of the plan was to review business potential for the Airport and develop a plan for the management and operation ofthe Airport, given the needs of aviation and the neighborhoods surrounding the airport. The Airport Business Plan reaffirmed Renton's commitment to strong management and operation of the Renton Municipal Airport. The recommendations reaffirmed the mix of uses presently at the Airport while supporting increased efforts to curb aircraft noise. Implementation of the Airport Master Plan The airport development and financial plan portions ofthe Master Plan identify the capital improvements that should be accomplished, specify when these improvements should be accomplished, and determine the economic feasibility of accomplishing the programmed improvements and developments. The schedule of developments and improvements is established in five-year increments, to coincide with the five-, 10- and 20-year projections ofthe Master Plan. Based upon the five-year schedule of improvements and developments, Federal Aviation Administration Airport Improvement Program Funds are requested for assistance with the accomplishment of those eligible projects programmed in the Master Plan. FREIGHT The Freight Chapter of the Transportation Element addresses the needs and impacts of goods movement and distribution in Renton. The Freight Chapter focuses on the two primary providers of freight transportation: trucking and freight rail. Objectives The Freight Chapter is based on the following objectives: XI-54 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Objective T-V: Maintain existing freight rail service to Renton commercial and industrial sites. Objective T-W: Maintain truck access between Renton industrial areas and the regional highway system. Objective T-X: Minimize the impact of truck traffic on general traffic circulation and on Renton neighborhoods. Policies Policy T-79. Heavy through truck traffic should be limited to designated truck routes in order to reduce its disruptive impacts. (In this context, "disruptive impacts" refers to nuisances, particularly noise and parking, associated with heavy trucks. In addition, the intent of the policies is to minimize the physical impact of heavy trucks on city streets.) Policy T-80. Transportation facihties should be designed to complement railroads. Policy T-81. Spur tracks should be located to provide a minimum number of street crossings and serve a maximum number of sites. Policy T-82. Strategies to minimize adverse impacts of railroad operations on adjacent residential property should be supported. Policy T-83. Support railroad crossing improvements that minimize maintenance and protect the street surface. Policy T-84. Where warranted, provide protective devices, such as barriers and warning signals, on at- grade crossings. Policy T-85. The City should continue to work with local, regional, state and federal agencies to address regional freight needs and to mitigate local impacts. Truck Routes The City has a system of truck routes (see Figure 7-1). . Trucks weighing over 26,000 pounds gross vehicle weight are restricted to operating on one ofthe designated truck routes. Trucks needing to make deliveries off of the designated truck routes are required to take the most direct arterial route to/from one ofthe designated truck routes. When more than one delivery off the designated truck routes can be combined to limit multiple intrusions into residential neighborhoods, a truck driver has an obligation to combine those trips. The truck route ordinance does not apply to the operation of Renton School District buses on designated routes, public transit on designated routes, garbage trucks, city maintenance vehicles, or emergency vehicles. XI-55 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 FIGURE 7-1 TRUCK ROUTES XI-56 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B Inventory of Local Rail System Facilities and Users The Freight Chapter of the Transportation Element recognizes the importance of maintaining rail transportation, which supports industrial and commercial land uses, and provides one component of a multi-modal transportation system. The Freight Chapter also provides guidelines to ensure that existing rail lines do not impact adjacent land uses, create maintenance problems for City streets or pose safety concerns. Freight rail service is currently available to several industrial and commercial areas ofthe City. Existing rail lines bordering the City of Renton include the Union Pacific (UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa ' Fe Railroad (BNSF) main line tracks between Seattle and Tacoma. Within the City of Renton, the BNSF 18th Subdivision Branch Line connects Renton and the east side of Lake Washington to the BNSF main line. The BNSF main line runs in a north-south direction and is located along the City of Renton's western city limits, separating Renton from the City of Tukwila. The BNSF main line is double-track, and carries a considerable volume of freight service, as well as passenger service provided by Amtrak under a trackage rights agreement. Only freight service is provided to the City of Renton from the BNSF main line. A single spur track with several branch lines serves the Renton Valley industrial area (southwest Renton). Another single spur track from the BNSF main line serves the Container Corporation of America plant, located north of 1-405 in the Earlington industrial area. Use of these spur lines is intermittent, usually on an as-needed basis with no particular set time or frequency. Commuter rail trains use the BNSF main line, with a stop at the new Renton/Tukwila (Longacres) station located just south of 1-405. The commuter rail service is an element of the Regional Transit Plan (Sound Move), approved by voters in 1996. The commuter rail service began in 2001. Three trains currently provide one-way service between Tacoma and Seattle during the weekday AM peak period and between Seattle and Tacoma in the weekday PM peak period, with stops at the Renton/Tukwila station. The BNSF 18th Subdivision Branch Line splits from the BNSF main line at the Black River Junction, and continues easterly through downtown Renton and then northerly through the North Renton industrial area. The line continues north along the east side of Lake Washington, and connects back with the BNSF main line in Snohomish County. Freight service on this branch line is provided by two trains per day (one in each direction). Passenger excursions are made on this branch line by the Spirit of Washington Dinner Train, which makes one round trip on weekdays and two round trips on weekends between downtown Renton and Woodinville at the north end of Lake Washington. Three spur tracks off of the branch line provide freight service to the Earlington industrial area in west central Renton. Two spur tracks serve the North Renton industrial area north of downtown Renton. Freight service can occur at any time during the day. The Spirit of Washington Dinner Train leaves downtown Renton at 6:00 p.m. and returns by 10:00 p.m. with an additional afternoon run on weekends. The infrequent use ofthe BNSF main line spur tracks and the BNSF branch line results in minimal disruption to vehicular traffic movement in Renton. The UPRR mainline track, located 200 to 300 feet west of the BNSF mainline and Renton's City limits, also runs in a north-south direction. The UPRR mainline is a single track, carrying a somewhat lower level of freight-only service. XI-57 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Regional Accessibility Trucks and Industrial Traffic Truck access from City of Renton industrial areas to the regional highway/freeway system has the option of several alternative designated truck routes (see Figure 7-1). The galley industrial area (southwest Renton) is directly connected to the regional system via the S.W. 43~ Street/SR-167 (Valley Freeway) interchange and the SR-181 (West Valley Highway)/I-405 interchange. The Earlington industrial area in west central Renton is served by designated truck routes on Rainier Avenue and Grady Way, which provide direct access to SR-167 and to 1-405 (via the SR-181/1-405 and SR-167/I-405 interchanges). Truck access to the North Renton industrial area (north of downtown Renton and west of 1-405) from I- 405 is provided via the designated truck route on Park Avenue North. Another truck route to 1-405 and SR-167 from the North Renton industrial area is via North 6* Street, Airport Way, and Rainier Avenue. Truck and industrial traffic access from 1-405 to the King County waste transfer station and maintenance shops east of 1-405 is provided via the Sunset and Maple Valley (SR-169) interchanges and N.E. 3rd Street-N.E. 4* Street. The Stoneway Sand and Gravel complex, west of 1-405, generates industrial traffic that uses the North Park Avenue on-ramp to access 1-405. Arterial improvement projects in the Transportation Plan will enhance truck access between the industrial areas and the regional highway/freeway system. Freight and Passenger Rail Use Future land use development is not anticipated to result in a significant increase in rail freight service in Renton. Future plans call for additional commuter rail trains using the BNSF main line, stopping at the Renton/Tukwila (Longacres) station. Freight Action Strategy (FAST) Corridor The Freight Action Strategy (FAST) corridor, and the projects which comprise FAST, evolved over several years. Beginning in 1994, the Freight Mobility Roundabout — a jointly-sponsored effort ofthe • Puget Sound Regional Council and the public/private Economic Development Council of Seattle and King County — made a sustained commitment to freight mobility within and through the northwest gateway region, which ties the regional (and national) economy to the Pacific Rim. Roundabout participants include shippers and carriers representing all freight mobility modes: marine, rail, truck, air, and intermodal. Other participants are public agencies at all levels: local governments (including the City of Renton), the three ports of Seattle, Tacoma and Everett, WSDOT and the State Transportation Commission, and federal agencies (FHWA, FT A). Late in 1994 the United States Department of Transportation together with the Roundabout, the WSDOT, and the Puget Sound Regional Council established FAST Corridor. FAST Corridor is a collection of complementary grade separation and port access projects within the Everett-Seattle-Tacoma area of Washington State. Collectively, these projects will enhance the movement of freight within and through the region. Key points of the FAST Corridor projects include: • Between Everett in the north and Tacoma in the south, focus on the region's north-south rail routes and port access routes. • .Helping to improve the state and region's transportation capacity to better meet the needs for freight and goods movements. • Implementation of a series of grade separation and port access improvements, along with some corollary improvements. These improvements will complement other freight and passenger rail improvements in the region, regional ITS efforts, and other planned highway improvements. XI-58 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B • Continuation ofthe FAST Corridor Partnership, which has been functioning since 1995 and is working on determining appropriate project level solutions to regional freight mobility issues. Local freight improvement projects identified at this time include additional rail lines for both the BNSF and UPRR lines. BNSF has plans to add a third and a fourth track to its mainline along the western edge ofthe City. UPRR also has plans to add a third additional track to its mainline that runs parallel to and is in close proximity to the BNSF mainline. A grade separation of the BNSF and UPRR mainlines at South 180* Street in Tukwila (S.W. 43rd Street in Renton) was completed in 2003. These improvements are a constructive first step toward improving rail freight travel along the western boundary ofthe City of Renton and associated freight rail travel passing through Renton. The Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSD3): • develops and maintains a comprehensive and coordinated state program to facilitate freight movement between and among local, national and international markets; • works to find solutions that lessen the impact of the movement of freight on local communities; ' • proposes policies, projects, corridors, and funding to the state legislature to promote strategic investments in a statewide freight mobility transportation system; and • proposes projects that lessen the impact of freight movement on local communities. In 2003, the FMSIB selected the SW 27* /Strander Boulevard project to receive $4,000,000. It is anticipated these funds will be programmed by 2009. FINANCING AND IMPLEMENTATION The Financing and Implementation Chapter outlines the strategies and actions to finance and implement the transportation improvements and programs planned as part of the City of Renton's transportation plan. Renton will meet transportation needs through arterial, transit, high occupancy vehicle, non-motorized improvements, travel demand management programs, and airport, truck and rail plans as outlined in previous discussion ofthe transportation plan. The Financing and Implementation Chapter includes: • Goals, objectives and policies relating to financing and implementation ofthe transportation plan. • Information on current revenue sources and future revenues. • Assessment of Renton's 20-year transportation needs and funding capability. • Assessment of Renton's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) with regard to transportation improvements and programs identified in this document. • Strategies and actions for financing and implementing the transportation plan over the next 20 years. • Identifying future ongoing work needed to finance and implement the transportation plan. Objectives The Financing and Implementation Chapter is based on the following objectives: Objective T-Y: Pursue adequate funding for transportation improvements from all potential sources in an efficient and equitable manner. XI-59 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Objective T-Z: Develop a staging and implementation plan that expedites transportation system improvement projects that i) improve HOV flow, ii) improve transit service, iii) improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities and iv) provide neighborhood protection against the impacts of through traffic. Policies Policy T-86. To support economic development, growth related traffic improvements should be funded by a combination of impact fees charged to new development and business license fees. Policy T-87. Coordinate equitable public/private partnerships to help pay for transportation improvements. Policy T-88. Pursue federal, state and local sources of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds) for transportation improvements. Policy T-89. Establish a mechanism to provide multi-jurisdictional cooperation to fund transportation improvements. This could include establishing joint and/or coordinated transportation mitigation systems with other jurisdictions. Policy T-90. Create a funding mechanism that can be applied across boundaries to address the impact of growth outside the city limits on the City's transportation system. Transportation Program Costs To determine transportation financing needs, a twenty-year (2002 to 2022) program (including arterial, HOV, transit and non-motorized components identified previously in this document) was established, and a planning level cost estimate prepared. Also included as an element of the 20-year funding needs are annual transportation programs that include: transportation system rehabilitation and maintenance; traffic operations and safety projects and programs; Transportation Demand Management/Commute Trip Reduction programs; neighborhood livability projects and programs; and, ongoing project development. These annual programs support and supplement the Street Network, HOV, Transit and Non-motorized Elements and are a necessary part of maintaining transportation level of service standards. The total cost of the 20-year transportation plan is estimated at $134 million. The costs ofthe various components of this plan are summarized in Table 8.1. The costs for the arterial, HOV and non-motorized components represent Renton's costs (including Renton's share of responsibility under joint projects with WSDOT and other local jurisdictions). This cost does not include costs of transportation projects that are the responsibility of the state, King County, and other cities (Newcastle, Tukwila, and Kent). The transit costs include only local match for Renton's local feeder system improvements, park-and-ride lots, signal priority, and transit amenities. Ongoing transportation planning work will include continued refinement of the 20-year transportation plan and costs. Inventory of Funding Sources Having established a 20-year transportation funding level of $134 million, an annual funding level of $6.7 million can be determined. Sources of revenue to provide this annual funding need are identified on Table 8.2. The Business License Fee is an annual per capita fee assessed to all businesses within the City of Renton. Currently, 85% ofthe annual revenue generated .from this fee is dedicated to fund transportation improvements. The Business License Fee is assumed to contribute 28% of the future annual funding level. XI-60 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TABLE 8.1 RENTON 20-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATES Arterial Plan: = . $ 60,000,000 HOV Plan: = $ 26,000,000 Transit Plan: = $ 15,000,000 Non-motorized Plan: = $ 4,500,000 Annual Programs: = $ 28.500.000 Total 20-Year Cost = $ 134,000,000 XI-61 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TABLE 8.2 CITY OF RENTON SOURCE OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDS Annual 20-Year Business License Fee Half-Cent Gas Tax Grants Developer Mitigation $ 1.88 million $ 0.35 million $ 3.90 million $ 0.57 million * $ $ $ $ 37.6 million 7.0 million 78.0 million 11.4 million TOTAL FUNDS: $ 6.70 million $ 134.0 million * In addition, there will be site-specific mitigation. The Half-Cent Gas Tax is a portion of the State gas tax revenue that is distributed to local jurisdictions based on population. The Half-Cent Gas Tax is assumed to remain at its current level and contribute 5.2% ofthe future annual funding level. The City of Renton has aggressively pursued federal and state grants in the past, which is assumed to continue, thus providing 58% of the future annual funding level. Examples of federal grants include the Surface Transportation Program (STP), Congestion Management Air Quality (CMAQ), and Transportation Enhancements Program, which are awarded regionally by the Puget Sound Regional Council and bridge replacement, road safety, and railroad crossing improvement programs administered by WSDOT. State grants include those provided by the Transportation Partnership Program (TPP), the Arterial Improvement Program (AD?), and Pedestrian Safety and Mobility Program (PSMP), which are administered by the Transportation Improvement Board. Developer mitigation revenue is obtained by the City of Renton through an assessment on development city-wide, based on the number of daily vehicle trips generated by a specific development multiplied by a fee per vehicle trip. Developer mitigation is assumed to contribute 9% ofthe future annual funding level. It should be noted that developer mitigation is not a reliable (or stable) source of transportation funds (as required by GMA). The irregularity of private development projects and thus uneven flow of mitigation revenue contribute to the unreliability of developer mitigation. It should also be noted that, in addition to a mitigation fee, private development approval will be conditioned on site-specific improvements to ensure that on-site and adjacent off-site transportation facility impacts are mitigated. Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) are formed by property owners to provide funds for the portion of the cost of improvement projects that benefit the properties. Petitions from two-thirds of the property owners of property equal to two-thirds ofthe assessed valuation ofthe LID area are required in order to form an LID. Because it cannot be determined when there will be enough petitioners to form an LID and, therefore, it is not known when an LID can be formed to make improvements, LIDs have not been included as a source of transportation funds. XI-62 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The above revenue sources are projected to remain approximately the same over the next 20 years, though the percent contribution from individual sources may change. However, trends in transportation financing are becoming apparent, which could affect the City of Renton's transportation revenue. The trends include: declining revenue available from several existing sources, such as the half-cent gas tax; transportation needs growing faster than available revenues; local, state, and federal requirements on transportation improvements lengthening the design process and increasing cost; the undetermined potential for new funding sources; and, the continued inability of regional agencies to address regional transportation needs. Ongoing transportation planning work will include a review and update of current revenue sources to reflect federal, state, and regional decisions regarding these revenue sources. Funding Program The Growth Management Act (GMA) requires "an analysis of funding capability to judge needs against probable funding resources." This includes development of a "multi-year financing plan" based on the needs identified in the transportation plan with "appropriate parts" serving as the basis for the Six-year Transportation Program required by the RCW for cities. The following presents the City of Renton's transportation finance plan (as required by GMA) and the underlying assumptions, which are: • to provide both a 20-year and a six-year transportation improvement program • establish consistency between the six-year and 20-year programs. A 20-year transportation program (comprised of improvements discussed previously in the Street Network, HOV, Transit, and Non-motorized Chapters and annual transportation programs) and a planning level cost estimate of $134 million (summarized on Table 8.2) have been established first. Based on the 20-year funding level of $134 million, an annual funding level of $6.7 million was determined. Having established an annual funding rate it can reasonably be assumed that if this funding level is maintained, if the facilities being funded are consistent with the 20-year plan, and if transit and HOV facilities are conscientiously emphasized, it should be reasonable to assume that the level of service can be maintained for the intervening years with the established funding rate. The City of Renton's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is part of an on-going process intrinsically linked with the development ofthe 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 Comprehensive Plan. Projects are developed and prioritized based on both specific goals to be achieved by the program and on general programming considerations. Those general progranumng considerations are: Planning. How a project fits with or addresses identified future transportation goals, demands, and plarming processes must be evaluated on both a local and regional level. This is strongly influenced by ongoing land use decisions and by regional highway and transit system plans. Financing. Many projects are dependent on receiving outside grants, formation of LIDs, or the receipt of mitigation funds. Prioritization has to take into account the peculiarities of each ofthe various fund sources and me .probabilities of when, and how much, money will be available. Scheduling. If a project is interconnected with, or interdependent on, other projects taking place, it is reflected in their relative priorities. X3-63 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Past Commitments. The level of previous commitment made by the City in terms of resources, legislative actions or interlocal 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 TP is evaluated and analyzed. They are: • Preservation of Existing mffastructure • Multi-Modal and Transportation Demand Management • Community Livability and Enhancement • Economic Development • Operations and Safety 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 unportant 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. Preservation ofthe existing infrastructure is a basic need that must be met by the program. The Mayor, City Council and Citizens Transportation Advisory Committee have all addressed the importance of sustaining strong programs in this project category. The State Growth Management Act also requires jurisdictions to assess and address the funding required to maintain their existing transportation system. Multi-Modal and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) projects and programs are oriented toward "moving people" through a balanced transportation system that involves multiple modes of transportation and provides alternatives to the existing heavy reliance on the single occupant vehicle (SOV). Included are projects that facilitate the movement of transit and carpools, and programs that promote the use of high occupancy vehicles (HOVs) and reduce the numbers of SOV's. The Federal Transportation Efficiency Act, the State and Federal Clean Air legislation and the State Commute Trip Reduction Act have added momentum to regional efforts and placed requirements on local jurisdictions such as Renton to promote these transportation elements. Community livability and enhancement consists of projects that 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. Economic development projects and programs involve transportation improvements necessitated by new development that is taking place. Thus, a significant source of local funding for these projects is projected to come from mitigation payments and from specific access needs financed by new development in the City of Renton. XI-64 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Operations and safety projects and programs are developed through ongoing analyses ofthe 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. The City of Renton's adopted 2008- 2013 Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program includes many of the transportation improvements and programs identified in the Street Network, Transit, HOV, Non- motorized and Transportation Demand Management Chapters of this Transportation Element. The projects or programs are listed in Table 8.3. Also shown in Table 8.3 are annual programs (transportation system rehabilitation and maintenance, traffic operations and safety; projects and programs, ongoing project development). The following lists various 2008- 2013 TIP projects under each of the chapters ofthe Transportation Element. XT-65 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 TABLE 8.3 CITY OF RENTON SFX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM CITY OF RENTON PLANNING i BUILDING /PUBLIC WORKS tSA«SP6RTAT[0N SYSTEMS DIVISION 2008-2013 SIX-YEAR TIP Total Project .Casts 78* Previews Costs . 2Pi% 2.013 Period Tola! Total Cut! 1 Street Owe-riav 1.240.504 555,000 £95.000 6£5.0CO ' ses.occ 685,DOC 685.000 4.110,000 5,350,604 : 2 Arterja? Rehab Prcsgf srn 435.000 •47-q.DQO 310.000 264,000 ' 633,000 220,OOC '220,000 2.120.000 2,555.000 a Duvsti Av'r Ivc 4.557,2-59 t «32.52£ 3.5.6.2.QS5 fi.25S.4S5 A Ouvji! Ave NE - King C»u.-i1y 2,554,104 3,532,475 3,533,475 5.DS7.572 Dyy*li Aw ME - .NE 7th Si is Suns*? £ •SVG-Q0 £15.000 2.750,300 1 .SSO-iOOC 5.250,000 5.250.000 « SR 16$ HOV - to 5R$D5. . 6,350.43'; ' 2,550.000 4.034,500] 10,474,^1 7 R*irtier -Ave - Grady Vvay to S 2nS SI 7.S35.2S1 10.200,000 £.503.000 3.700,000 1.300.000 2E.5SE.3S1 t SW -27Th Si'Sirander 6v Ceorwfeei. 9,325,045 6.426.000 -B.2iG,Q00 1,096 ;5D0 1 t£26,S>00 20.$K),SDD 45,402 £E& £4,72S,S4S 5 NE 4!h St'rlc-tiL'Sarn Av K'E 3SS.544 • 33,455 33,45$ 400,000 ie Ripley Lane 200.000 447 .DOC 447,000 W7.00C Garden Ave IN Widenint; 500,000 500.000 500,000 1,000,000 1,500.002 <5 MayCr*eSi Bridge-KepUeeirwrct • 185.603 20,000 £50,000 1 SO .000 5,000 735.OD0 ' 520,605 13 Montarrery / ME 20th SI Well fttp 30,003 30,000 30.00&. ' 1* Bride* Inspection's. Repair 135,2.70 1O0.D0D 330,300 50,003 55.0CC 50,000 50,000 535,000 773,2'73 is lrit*rvfcc(von Safety £ MsbiMy 250,000 400,000 250,000 350.000 250 .COG 25O;0O0 250.000 1-.650,000 1 ,S0D,OOD 1C Traffic Safety PfograiT; 131,6S3 20,000 20.C-OO -10.000 40,000 40,000 40,000 200,000 351.565 School SoneSigJi Upgrades • 200:103 100.000 100,000: 300,703 if RR Cros-wng Safety Prog. 5,423 5,000 .. s.ogo 10.000 20,000 ' 25,4S£ Loop Reptacemenl Program 20,0X-2S.O00 !30'.'CJt2J 30.000 30tCOOi ' 30.0001 ^SS.DOO !&5.iK)0 IS Sign Replacement Program S.S55 5,000 5,030 7,500 7,500 7.500! ?t&5D 40.003-49,9.53 21 poSt Program 39,62& 2o,aoo 2G.000 25,000 25.000 25.000} '25 .COD 140.000 178;£2S 12 Tralfle EflieienvV Pfon; am 156,113 50.000 50.000 50,000 30,000 3D,0DD| 30,000 2^0,000 396.113 2J Transit Program S3.245 75,000 75.005} 74,000 74.000 74,0-33! 70.DO3 442.000 4SS.34S 2-4 TDM Program 105,207 55,000 £5.000' £5,000 S5.CO0 35.000! £5,000 390.000 495,207 3fi Sjc^-ct*; RoLrts D-e-v Proprs-n '(33,753 is.ooo 12.000} 110,000 60,000 30,0-30 ao.coo 3&e.oDa 525.753 .25 vy*ifc*vay program 520,372 253.000 250.00Dj 250,000 250,000 350 £OC 350.000 - 1.760,000 E.6SD,372 7? Mtssing LJnks Program 53.1 SO 3Q,0Q0 30.000 . . 30.000 . 30.000 30.003 30,000 180^00 23S.5SO 25 Barrier Ff*e Transition Flj>n Impiiwnfti 50.000 50.0'X SC'.DdD 50,000 5-C.0G0 £0,000 300,000 300,000 7S snufh R*»tor* Project 40S.2S0 2.000 2.000 408,250 ' M Project DevclE3prrnrnt;Pr»id*s}gr5 £52,725 148,000 200,000 200,000 200,000 200.000 1.146,000 1.430.72S 11 Arterial Circulation Pragranj 2S7.EOG . 200,000 250.600 250.000 250,000 250,000 250.000 1,450,000 1,737.606 31 Trans Concurrency 50,000 - • 40.000 10.000 10,000 -10.000 so.oco 3G,0D0 200,000 si Environment^ Mowttsnng 50.000 30.000 30.000 30.000 3COO0 30,000 200.OQC 34S.S3& 3-t Vv'SDOT Coordination Propigm 1S.71G 65,000 $2,000 S0.CDD eo.ooo • 40,000 40,C<X> 330.000 349.71 D as GE5 N*eds Assess t7leJrt 40.531 20,000 20.000 20,000 150,000 150.000 ",50.000 51G.DOC 550,531 it 1*A for tin: Arts rr.505 30,000 30,000 SO.OOO 30.0DD 30,000 30,000 200,000 277,505 J-7 Ht>"s*r V*Jy 5 - M*m to Burnet! 350.000 350.003 350,000 1.050.00C •s ,050,000 s* HE 2rd*NE 4-th Corridor 2.000 320.000 4,050.000 •s .770.0X1 1,640,000 1.640.000 S.422.000 9,2-45,1.27 •as Laiw: Wash. Ev-P*.*H *0 Caulon Pit 325.412 135.325 220 73-E SAB.IB', 45 Line! Av - SW 16tr>-5Vi? £Ztd 5,COD 5.000 5.0-30 *;.S--4,00Q S2E.00Q 2.S5G.0X 2..555.0OO Logan Av Concrete parvci R«p=« j -«SO,000 463,002 4G0.QDC « Sam CKasiain Lafet WA Trell Connect 50,000 BS3,CvCi 4,300.000 5.000,000) 5,000.000 To'-*! Source! 2S.52S.S71 21,eiD.E26! 16.S0J.513 13.2E5:72£ 1?.B2£.B00 27,323.300 -21.6SS.S35: 15S,e6S,723 XI-66 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Street Network • Rainier Avenue - Grady Way to South 2nd Street (TIP #7) • Garden Avenue North- North 8* Street to Park Drive (TIP #2) . Lind Avenue S W - S W 16th Street to S W 43rd Street (TIP #40) • Duvall Avenue NE - Sunset Boulevard to Renton City Limits (TIP #33) • Strander Boulevard - SR-181 to Oakesdale Avenue SW (TIP #8) • NE 3rd/NE 4th Corridor Improvements (TIP #38) • Lake Washington Blvd. - Park Avenue North to Coulon Park (TIP #3 9) • South Renton Neighborhood Improvements (#29) • NE 4tt/Hoquiam Avenue N.E. (TIP #9) Included in the Six-Year TIP is the Arterial Circulation Program (TIP #31), which will provide funding for further development of multi-modal improvements on Renton's arterials to support the Transportation Plan and comply with clean air legislation. Also included are expenditures for project development studies (TIP #30) for development of future TIP projects and grant applications for currently proposed and future TIP projects. Transit • • Transit Program: facilities to support regional transit service, local transit service improvements; development of park and ride lots, transit amenities (TIP #23) Also, the HOV Chapter improvements identified below will be designed to enhance transit service. HOV • SW 27* Street HOV (TIP #8) • SR-169 HOV - Sunset Blvd. to east City Limits (TIP #6) It should be noted that the expenditure shown for the Transit Program (TIP #23) includes coordination with the State and Sound Transit HOV direct access interchange improvements. Also included in the Transit Program (TIP #23) is funding for further development of Renton HOV improvements identified previously in the HOV Plan (Figure 3-1), and to examine additional routes and corridors for HOV facilities in Renton. Non-Motorized • Barrier Free Transition Plan Implementation (TIP #28) • Sam Chastain Lake Washington Trail Connection (TIP #42) Also included in the proposed Six-Year TIP is the Walkway Program (TIP #26), which will provide funding for sidewalk and handicap curb ramp needs identified in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Program. The Bicycle Route Development Program (TIP #25) will upgrade existing bicycle routes, construct missing links in the bicycle route system, and develop, evaluate, prioritize future bicycle facilities. These projects are in addition to bicycle and pedestrian improvements, anticipated as part of arterial, HOV and transit proj ects. XI-67 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Implementation ofthe non-motorized element falls into two categories - walkways/sidewalk and bike facilities. Each of these components are described below. Walkways/Sidewalks Implementation. The implementation procedures for the City's comprehensive walkway/sidewalk program is detailed in the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study. This report identifies the sidewalk and curb ramp needs within the City. Specific improvements will be prioritized and will respond to the needs of school children, the aged and persons with disabilities, and will support increased use of transit. Bike Facilities Implementation. Bicycle facilities include lanes along roadways and signed bicycle routes. Current funding is provided for the construction of segments ofthe Lake Washington Loop Trail. Bicycle route designation and signing along City roadways is provided on an as-needed basis by the Transportation Systems Division of the Plarming/Building/Public Works Department. Project prioritization is determined by the Transportation Systems Division in coordination with the Community Services Department. Funding for bicycle signing is provided through the capital improvement programs and the General Fund operating budgets of the Transportation Systems Division. Signing specifically identified as part of transportation projects will be funded through the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Trails Implementation. Many ofthe planned pedestrian/bicycle facilities in the Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, administered by the Community Services Department, would be valuable components ofthe transportation system, and, therefore, are coordinated with the Transportation Plan. The Long Range, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan contains the recommended six-year trails development program. Only projects that are specifically identified as transportation facilities will be included in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). TDM/CTR • Transportation Demand Management Program: implement Commute Trip Reduction Act requirements, other TDM programs (TIP #24) Funding Assessment A 20-year transportation program has been established having an estimated cost of $134 million. This program was the basis for determining an annual funding level of $6.7 million. Assuming this annual funding level can be maintained over the 20-year period (2002-2022), it is reasonably certain that the 20- year transportation program can be implemented. Annual reassessment of transportation needs, continuing to aggressively pursue grant funding, and/or continuation of the strong rate of growth in Renton, which will generate higher developer mitigation revenue, will be needed over the intervening years in order to assume the 2022 transportation program can be achieved. The City of Renton's proposed 2008-2013 Six-Year TIP includes 42 individual projects and programs, with a total estimated cost of $159.7 million. Of this total cost, approximately $121.7 million is to be expended over the 2008-2013 six-year period. (It should be noted that for several projects and programs, expenditures over the six-year period are shown, not the total project or program cost.) The difference of about $3 8 million represents expenditures prior to year 2007. The projected revenues over the six-year period, based on the established $6.7 million annual funding, will total $40.2 million. The TIP identified expenditures of $121.7 million is $81.5 million more than the projected revenues. Of this $81.5 million, approximately $44 million represents the amount of participation XI-68 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Attachment B anticipated by the State, Sound Transit, King County, neighboring jurisdictions, and private sector contributions on joint projects. As previously discussed, transportation improvement expenditures of other jurisdictions have not been included when establishing the $6.7 million annual funding level. Therefore, the Six-Year TIP expenditures exceed projected revenues by $37.5 million. In order for projects to be eligible for projected funding, they must be, by law, included in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Because it is not possible to know which projects will qualify for funding, the Six-Year TIP includes a cross-section of projects to provide a list of projects that will be eligible for funding from the various revenue sources, when and if, such funds become available. The result is a Six-Year TIP which has expenditures exceeding projected revenues. The challenge for the future will be to secure enough funding for the City of Renton, Cities of Tukwila and Kent, King County, Sound Transit, and the state to implement the improvements to their respective facilities included in the Transportation Plan. However, several strategies for acquiring needed funding are evident at this time. They include: • Establish interjurisdictional funding mechanisms, such as payment of mitigation fees to address impacts of growth within adjacent jurisdictions that affect the City of Renton. • Update transportation priorities annually and incorporate in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program. • Continue to work more aggressively with adjacent cities, King County, Washington State Department of Transportation and other agencies to fund their respective improvements in the Transportation Plan, i.e., through joint projects. • Continue to work with regional agencies to encourage them to find and fund regional solutions for regional transportation problems. Mitigation Process There are new laws and regulations that have tremendous impacts on land use, the need for new or different kinds of transportation projects and programs, and costs and funding of transportation projects. Examples are the Wetlands Management Ordinance, Surface Water Management Ordinance, the Clean Air Act, Commute Trip Reduction Act, Endangered Species Act, and the Growth Management Act. As a result, a transportation mitigation policy and process has been developed as part ofthe transportation plan. This mitigation policy serves as a framework for the citywide mitigation payment system that was adopted by the City in 1996. This mitigation policy includes the City of Renton: • Developing a citywide 20-year transportation system improvement plan (defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan). • Determining the cost of the citywide 20-year transportation improvements to support new development. • Establishing a fee for developments' pro-rated share of the cost ofthe citywide 20-year transportation improvements (in addition to site-specific mitigation required by the City). This mitigation fee would be established during the SEPA review process and paid during the project development process. XL-69 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 • Continuing the current established business license fee and percentage of the business license fee allocated for transportation purposes as has been the custom in the past. • Having the flexibility to modify the citywide transportation plan as needed to address environmental/regional coordination issues. • Approving future development conditioned upon site specific improvements to ensure that on-site and adjacent transportation facility impacts are mitigated, and the payment of the mitigation fee as the development's fair share contribution towards: 1) ensuring that the cumulative impacts of development can be mitigated; and 2) maintaining the City of Renton adopted level of service standard. Site specific improvements could include construction of additional traffic lanes and/or traffic signals. Mitigation Payment System The development mitigation fairshare cost has been established at $75 per daily vehicle trip. The developer mitigation fee is based on the total daily increase in vehicle trips generated by the specific development project multiplied by the vehicle trip rate fee. In addition to this fee, there may be site-specific improvements required by the City, such as construction or contribution towards construction of additional traffic lanes and/or traffic signals, to mitigate on-site and adjacent facility impacts. (New business development will also pay the annual per capita business license as currently required of all businesses in the City of Renton). Additional information on the determination ofthe mitigation trip rate fee is contained in the Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee Support Document. A development may qualify for reduction of the $75 per vehicle trip mitigation fee through certain credits for development incentives, construction of needed transportation improvements (arterial, HOV, transit), through public/private partnerships, and transportation demand management programs. Specific credits and the amount of reduction in the mitigation trip rate fee that could result from such credits will be determined on a case by case basis during the development permitting process. The Mitigation Payment System provides flexibility to modify the basic trip rate fee as needed to respond to the effect that credits may have on developer mitigation as a funding source. Concurrency Management System The Growth Management Act (GMA) describes concurrency as the situation where adequate public facilities are available when the impacts of development occur, or within a specified time thereafter. This description includes the concept of available public facilities. The GMA defines "available public facilities" as facilities or services in place, or a financial commitment in place, to provide the facihties within a specified time. For transportation, the specified time is six years from time of development. City of Renton policies that support the GMA's definition of concurrency have been identified in the Land Use Element and in this Element. To address concurrency under the GMA and City of Renton policies, a concurrency management system has been developed for the City of Renton that is based on the following process: • The City of Renton will adopt a multi-modal Transportation Plan that will be consistent with regional plans and those of neighboring cities. Improvements and programs of the Transportation Plan will be defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. XI-70 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 • The City of Renton Transportation Level of Service (LOS) Policy, although it differs from the traditional LOS for arterials, is consistent with King County Growth Management Countywide Planning Policies and will be used to evaluate the City of Renton Transportation Plan. • If the region decides to lower regional LOS by not providing regional facilities, then Renton will adjust its LOS policy accordingly. • The Transportation Plan will include a financial component with cost estimates and funding strategy. One ofthe fund sources will be mitigation fees collected from developers as a condition of land use development within the City of Renton. The approval of the development will be conditioned upon the payment of this Transportation Mitigation Fee and site-specific mitigation of on-site and adjacent facility impacts. • The City of Renton may allocate the developer funds to any ofthe improvement elements ofthe citywide Transportation Plan in such a manner to assure that concurrency between transportation LOS and land use development is met. • The City of Renton will establish concurrency by testing the citywide Transportation Plan as funded in the Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program to ensure conformance with the Level of Service standard. The City of Renton will adjust the transportation improvement plan as necessary to meet the LOS standard. • Based upon the test of the citywide Transportation Plan, consideration of growth levels included in the LOS-tested Transportation Plan, payment of a Transportation Mitigation Fee, and an application of site specific mitigation, development will have met City of Renton concurrency requirements. Transportation Concurrency Regulations (Ordinance No. 4708, adopted 3-2-1998) and Guidelines and Procedures for Monitoring Transportation Concurrency (adopted 4-6-1998) comprise the procedures, standards and criteria that allow the City of Renton to determine whether adequate public facilities are available to serve new land use development. As specified in the Regulations and Guidelines and Procedures, a concurrency test is conducted by the City of Renton for each non-exempt development activity. The concurrency test determines consistency with the adopted citywide Level of Service standard and the Concurrency Management System, using rules and procedures established by the City of Renton. The concurrency test includes technical review of a development activity by the City of Renton to determine if the transportation system has adequate or unused or uncommitted capacity, or will have adequate capacity, to accommodate vehicle trips generated by the proposed development, without causing the level of service standard to decline below adopted standards, at the time of development or within six years. A written finding of concurrency is provided by the City prior to the approval ofthe development permit. If the development activity fails the concurrency test, the City allows the development applicant to submit alternative data, provide a traffic mitigation plan, or reduce the size of the development project in order to achieve concurrency. Monitoring, and evaluation ofthe City of Renton's Concurrency Management System and Transportation Concurrency Regulations will be reviewed as part of ongoing transportation work. Sunset Area Community Roadway Improvements The City of Renton studied potential infrastructure improvement needs to support growth anticipated in the Sunset Area Community Planned Action EIS in completed April 2011. The planned action neighborhood XI-71 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 study area is generally bounded by NE 21st Street on the north, Monroe Avenue NE on the east, NE 7th Street on the south, and Edmonds Avenue NE. Capital improvements identified in the EIS would be needed within the 2011-2030 time frame. The improvements identified in the EIS are estimated to cost S3 8.4 million. The project costs and funding sources for these projects are identified in the Sunset Area Community Capital Facilities Plan found within the City's Capital Facilities Element. XI-72 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL RESOURCES The Environmental and Natural Resources Chapter describes objectives, policies, and strategies to help protect Renton's natural resources and Renton residents from unacceptable air and water quality impacts of the transportation system. Clean air and water are necessary for healthful living in an urban society. Objectives Objective T-AA: Protect and promote clean air to ensure a healthful environment. Objective T-BB: Reduce vehicular emissions by encouraging increases in carpooling, vanpooling, transit, and non-motorized transportation usage. Objective T-CC: Ensure the long-term protection ofthe quality of water resources of the City of Renton. Objective T-DD: Reduce the impact on water quality from vehicular pollutants associated with run-off from impervious transportation facility surfaces. Objective T-EE: Preserve and protect natural resources (particularly critical areas and wildlife habitat). Policies Policy T-91. Promote programs which maintain mobile source pollutant levels at or below those prescribed by the EPA, State Department of Ecology, and the Puget Sound Clean Air Agency. Policy T-92. Comply with the stipulations described in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance. Policy T-93. Promote water quality by encouraging increases in carpooling, vanpooling, transit, and non- motorized transportation usage. Policy T-94. Incorporate in transportation facilities vehicular pollutant and surface water run-off management and treatment techniques that maximize water quality. Policy T-95. Comply with the stipulations described in federal, state, and local water quality standards and regulations. Policy T-96. Develop transportation plans and projects to comply with City, state, and federal regulations that address critical areas and wildlife habitat. Also see related Policies in the Environmental Element, the Land Use Element, and the King County Countywide Planning Policies, which by this reference, are incorporated in this Chapter. Air Quality — Implementation Plan The City will subscribe to the plans, policies, and programs catalogued in the State Implementation Plan for air quality non-attainment areas. Transportation demand management (TDM) strategies will be encouraged, including the Commute Trip Reduction Law. Existing vehicle programs such as the winter oxygenated fuels and vehicle inspections will be continued, supported, and updated as requirements demand. XI-73 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Ongoing transportation planning work will include the review of the latest information from state and local agencies regarding air quality non-attainment areas, severity of violations and implementation plans. Improving Water Quality The City of Renton will comply with federal, state, and local plans, policies and programs for water quality. The City's Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on increasing the availability and use of HOV, transit, and non-motorized transportation modes and transportation demand management strategies. The intent of this program is to reduce vehicular traffic which will make it possible to limit the expansion of the existing roadway system and, in certain locations, limit additional impervious surfaces. This, in turn, will reduce vehicular pollutants and their effect on water quality. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION A multitude of agencies are involved in transportation planning and improvement. To become better integrated into the regional transportation system, Renton needs to strengthen its role in the region, especially in South King County, East King County, and the Puget Sound area, and participate in regional forums as transportation decisions are made. This is particularly important since a disproportionate number of the vehicles on Renton's arterials are pass-through traffic. Also, Renton continues to be a major regional employment center and decisions made about future transportation systems for the Puget Sound area will directly impact the future of Renton's commercial and industrial base. With requirements of the Growth Management Act mandating concurrency between land use and transportation planning, the kind of interjurisdictional cooperation envisioned in the policies has become more of a reality. However, in this environment it will become increasingly important for Renton to support negotiation tools such as interlocal agreements, and participate in interjurisdictional decision making. Therefore, the City of Renton participates in regional forums and supports transportation plans that preserve the livability of our neighborhoods, maintain the economic vitality of our City, and provide for an improved environment for future generations. This will be accomplished by: • providing a multi-modal regional plan with HOV, transit and other modes serving Renton; and • providing regional financial strategies which encourage other than SOV travel. The City of Renton has prepared and adopted a multi-modal Transportation Plan, which is consistent with regional plans and plans of neighboring cities. XI-74 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Objectives Objectives and Policies which address the need for coordination between regional and local agencies with respect to transportation planning and operation needs are presented below: Objective_T-FF: Coordinate transportation operations, planning and improvements with other transportation authorities and municipalities. Policies Policy T-97. A sub-regional transportation system should be designed and implemented in cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions. Policy T-98. WSDOT should provide funding for and construct grade-separated inside HOV lanes with direct access (or barrier-separated HOV facility) in the SR-167 corridor from Auburn to Renton and 1-405 corridor, extending from Sea-Tac Airport north to Bothell. Policy T-99. The Regional Transit Plan (RTP) should include regional express bus service to downtown Renton. Policy T-100. Provide park-and-ride lots in unincorporated King County to intercept pass through traffic affecting the Renton street system. Transit service to these park-and-ride lots should be frequent in order to encourage transit usage. Policy T-101. King County Transit (Metro) should provide intra-Renton bus service to serve local activity centers and employment centers, and to provide frequent, convenient access to future commuter rail stations and light rail transit stations. Policy T-102. The City of Renton, in collaboration with King County Transit (Metro), should place high priority in providing transit service to areas experiencing high residential and commercial growth. Policy T-103. The Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) should provide transit service and transit- oriented capital improvements in Renton consistent in size, scope, and cost with those proposed in the voter- approved Sound Move. Policy T-104. Give priority to working with King County to ensure that King County policies regarding transportation consistency/concurrency in Renton's Potential Annexation Areas are compatible with Renton's transportation plans and goals. Also see related Policies in the Transit Section and King County Countywide Planning Policies. Current Coordination Activities The City of Renton has been actively involved in an ongoing dialogue with state, regional, and county agencies — as well as adjacent jurisdictions and business and community groups in Renton — concerning Renton's transportation planning goals and objectives. Coordination efforts underway include participation in the following primary forums. (Note: not all committees are listed.) State Coordination [Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT)] 1-405 Corridor Study. The City is participating in this WSDOT study along with representatives of affected jurisdictions adjacent to 1-405. Renton elected officials serve on the study's Executive Committee and Renton staff serve on the Steering Committee and Technical Committee. The purpose ofthe study is to work with local jurisdictions to define transportation needs in the 1-405 Corridor from Tukwila to Swamp Creek, XI-75 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 and to develop transportation improvement projects for the corridor that complement local plans, goals, and objectives. Regional Coordination •South County Area Transportation Board (SCATBd). The purpose of the group is to serve as a central forum for information-sharing, consensus-building, coordination to resolve transportation issues, and to implement transportation programs and projects that benefit the region in general and South King County area jurisdictions in particular. Voting members include King County and the cities of Algona, Auburn, Black Diamond, Burien, Covington, Des Moines, Enumclaw, Federal Way, Kent, Maple Valley, Milton, Normandy Park, Pacific, Renton, SeaTac, and Tukwila. Non-Voting members include Sound Transit, Pierce Transit, the Port of Seattle, the Puget Sound Regional Council, WSDOT, and the State Transportation Improvement Board (TIB). Eastside Transportation Partnership (ETP). ETP is a coalition of Eastside cities (similar to SCATBd), with representatives from Bellevue, Kirkland, Redmond, Issaquah, Bothell, Mercer Island, Sammamish, Woodinville, Newcastle, and Renton. Representatives from WSDOT, Sound Transit, King County, PSRC, TIB, and Snohomish County also are participants. Renton's primary affiliation and purpose for participating in the group is to coordinate Eastside and South County issues. Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). The PSRC is a regional council of governments and the local MPO and RTPO, with representatives from every agency, jurisdiction, and governing body in King County, Pierce County, Kitsap County and Snohomish County. Staff level technical committees meet regularly to discuss a wide range of transportation topics related to the region's long range growth and transportation strategy as envisioned under VISION 2020 and Destination 2030, including finance, transportation improvement programs, commute trip reduction issues, regional transportation forecast data, air quality, and other issues requiring regional coordination. Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority/Sound Transit. The City coordinates regularly with Sound Transit staff, as Sound Transit is the regional transit service provider. For long range planning, Renton and other jurisdictions are working with Sound Transit to implement Phase 1 ofthe Regional Transit Plan (Sound . Move), which includes Regional Express bus service and associated capital facilities, and HOV/transit exclusive interchanges and/or arterial HOV improvements in Renton. County Coordination King County Metro. The City is also coordinating with King County Transit (Metro) in the development of local bus service plans that will complement the Sound Transit regional transit service concept. King County Public Works Directors. The City works as a member of this group on numerous and varied transportation action issues of concern to local jurisdictions including making recommendations for projects to be funded with the regional distribution of federal transportation funds. Commute Trip Reduction. Another group within King County is responsible for coordinating regional and South County Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) issues in cooperation with local jurisdictions and King County. Working groups have been established for the purpose of coordinating state-required CTR ordinance and plan development/adoption by local jurisdictions and King County. With most local jurisdictions having successfully adopted local CTR ordinances, the group is now focusing on the successful implementation of the ordinance requirements (working with affected employers) and on starting a parking review regional coordinating effort. XI-76 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions The City of Renton is coordinating and will continue to coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions through interlocal agreements and through appropriate regional, county, local, and state forums to assure consistency between plans, and to work out acceptable and appropriate agreements regarding local plans. Impacts on Regional Transportation Plan The City of Renton has adopted a position that specifies the elements that must be included in a regional transit plan in order for the City to meet the requirements ofthe Growth Management Act. The City Council supports the following elements in the voter-approved regional system plan (Sound Move): 1. A bus element, with early emphasis on express bus service and TSM improvements proposed for the South County area; 2. A plan that increases local circulation transit services and feeder service connections and provides a variety of modal options; 3. High Capacity Transit (HCT) to urban and employment centers, including Renton; and 4. A plan that provides convenient connections within the regional bus service, local bus service, and between the light rail line and the commuter rail system. Renton is coordinating with Sound Transit to ensure commensurate transit services and/or roadway/freeway improvements should any elements ofthe approved regional plan that benefit Renton not be implemented. Strategies to Address Inconsistencies Inconsistencies between Renton, the State, King County, Sound Transit, and other local jurisdictions will be addressed by interlocal agreement as specified in King County Growth Management policies. ONGOING TRANSPORTATION PLAN WORK This Transportation Element includes a number of recommendations for ongoing transportation work. This additional work will include continued refinement of certain elements of the transportation plan and development of more detailed strategies and programs to implement the transportation plan. The specific transportation planning tasks are summarized in this section. Street Network Level of Service (LOS) Continue to refine and update Renton's LOS policy to reflect new information on regional and local transportation plans. Arterial Plan Conduct further analysis ofthe improvements included in the Arterial Plan to verify physical, operational, and financial feasibility. The analyses will include development of conceptual plans and cost estimates, assessment of neighborhood and environmental impacts, and the development of more detailed scopes of improvement, as appropriate. Adjust the Arterial Plan, as needed, to reflect the results on this analysis. Re-evaluate residential, commercial, and industrial access street function definitions and classifications. XI-77 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Transit Transit Plan Update and revise Renton's Transit Plan to reflect new information regarding the Regional Transportation Plan (Sound Move). Conduct further analysis ofthe local feeder system transit improvements identified in the City of Renton Transit Needs Assessment in order to verify operational and financial feasibility. (Includes the development and incorporation of more detailed bus routing and dial-a-ride needs.) Level of Service Continue to refine the transit index of Renton's LOS standard to address transit service frequency. HOV HOV Plan Continue the assessment of criteria for HOV facility planning, design, and operation. Conduct further analysis of the HOV improvements identified in the HOV Plan in order to verify physical, operational, and financial feasibility. Also, investigate other potential locations for HOV improvements, and define scope and cost ofthe proposed improvements in more detail, as appropriate. Level of Service Continue to update the HOV index of Renton's LOS standards, if needed. Non-motorized Neighborhood and Regional Access Based on the City of Renton Comprehensive Citywide Walkway Study, determine additional bicycle and pedestrian facilities that support Renton's access needs and complement the Regional Transit Plan and local transit system. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plan Update the routes identified in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plan to reflect the reassessment of neighborhood and regional access needs. Identify, in cooperation with other City of Renton departments and citizen groups, the facilities that could be included in the City of Renton's transportation funding program. TDM/CTR Existing Parking Supply and Demand Inventory existing citywide on-site and off-site parking facilities to determine number of spaces and utilization, if needed during future review of parking policies, guidelines, and regulations. Parking Policy Review and Revisions Continue to review, update and/or revise Renton parking policies to complement other elements ofthe Renton Transportation Plan and to be consistent with regional parking policies. Working in regional forums propose parking regulation revisions to be worked out on a sub-regional basis. Employer Mode Split XI-78 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 With assistance from King County, evaluate updated Renton employers CTR data and revise citywide employer mode split if needed. TDM/CTR Programs Renton's CTR ordinance was amended in February, 1998. Public and private employers have developed programs for complying with the ordinance. Annual review of these programs will be conducted to monitor progress toward meeting CTR goals. Also, the city will be working with WSDOT, Puget sound Regional council, King county, Metro Transit and others to develop rules and create new plans to implement the CTR Efficiency act adopted by the Washington State Legislature in 2006. The CTR Efficiency Act includes changes to the CTR law to make the program more effective, efficient and targeted. The modified CTR program will officially start on January 1, 2008. Parking Management Ordinance Continue to review the City of Renton parking regulations for revisions to complement the Renton Land Use Element and Transportation Element and to be consistent with regional and other local jurisdictional parking policies. Airport Continue to update the goals, objectives, policies, functional requirements, and implementation strategies of the Airport Chapter ofthe Transportation Element, as needed. Freight Inventory of Local Rail System Facilities and Users Update assessment of rail use compatibility with current land uses and FAST implementation strategies, as needed. Regional Accessibility Continue to review, and update if needed, the assessment of Renton rail use with respect to implications of the Regional Transit Plan (Sound Move) and to reflect Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) decisions. Freight and Passenger Rail Use Review and update the assessment of freight and passenger rail needs, as appropriate. Financing and Implementation Program and Project Costs Update the scope and cost of improvements determined from the continued feasibility analysis ofthe arterial and HOV elements. Also, update the scope and cost of transit, non-motorized and other programs included in the City of Renton's transportation funding program. Update the cost ofthe 20-year transportation plan, as needed. Mitigation Process Adjust the citywide developer mitigation fee structure, if needed, to reflect revisions to the financing plan resulting from further analysis ofthe Transportation Plan improvements and costs, and funding sources. Funding Program Adjust the priority of projects or programs identified under the Arterial, Transit, HOV, Non-Motorized, and TDM chapters as needed. Review the multi-year (20 years) financing plan and assess funding needs for the XI-79 Attachment B ORDINANCE NO. 5612 identified projects or programs. Include appropriate projects and programs in the City's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Identify potential sources of additional funds, if funding from current sources is not adequate, and to reflect federal, State, regional or local decisions regarding availability of current sources. Concurrency Continue to review, and revise if needed, the implementation, monitoring, and evaluation aspects ofthe Concurrency Management System (CMS) and update, as necessary, the rules, regulations and ordinances that implement the concurrency requirements. Coordinate with adjacent jurisdictions regarding CMS requirements and regulations. Environmental and Natural Resources Continue to review and revise, as needed, the objectives, policies and strategies to minimize or mitigate impacts of transportation plans on Renton's environment and natural resources. Review the latest air and water quality implementation plans from local and state agencies, and update if needed. Intergovernmental Coordination Continue to coordinate Renton's Transportation Element with adjacent jurisdictions' transportation and land use goals, countywide policies, regional land use and transportation plans, and statewide goals outlined in the GMA. Regulations, facilities to be provided, and development actions by regional and other local jurisdictions may change, which could affect the City of Renton. Pursue strategies to address inconsistencies, i.e. through interlocal agreements, and adjust Renton's Transportation Element, as needed. XI-80 ORDINANCE NO. 5612 ATTACHMENT C AMENDMENTS TO UTILITIES ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 UTILITIES ELEMENT GOAL Facilitate the development and maintenance of all utilities at the appropriate levels of service to accommodate the growth that is anticipated in the City of Renton. xn-i Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Summary: The Utilities Element guides future utility service within the greater Renton area. It helps ensure that adequate utilities will be available to both existing and new development. It also ensures that utility improvements will be used to help implement the Comprehensive Plan and will be phased according to community priorities. The Utilities Element indicates how utility improvements can be used to maintain equitable levels of service, guarantee public health and safety, and serve new development in a timely manner. In addition, the Utilities Element defines how to minimize the detrimental impacts of utility improvements on surrounding development as well as the community as a whole. The Utilities Elements looks to promote efficiency in the provision or improvement of service wherever appropriate and feasible. In addition, it asks that the costs of improvements should be distributed in an equitable manner. Beyond the City's existing boundaries, the Utilities Element fosters coordination with regional and adjacent utility systems. It also guides the provision of services to areas outside of the City, but within the City's planning area especially in cases of annexation. The City of Renton provides water, wastewater, and storm water utility services for citizens residing within the city limits and by agreement with other purveyors for some areas located outside ofthe City's boundaries. Renton contracts with a private hauler for collection of solid waste and residential recycling. Other utility services that affect the City include: cable television, conventional telephone, fiber optic cable systems, cellular telephone service, natural gas, petroleum products, and electricity. (See the Annexation Section of the Land Use Element, the Stormwater Section of the Environmental Element and the Capital Facilities Element for additional policies related to the Utilities Element.) General Policies Discussion: The following general policies are designed to ensure that utility services are safely and efficiently provided, and are constructed in an environmentally sound manner that reasonably mitigates impacts on adjacent land uses. The policies also emphasize cooperation and coordination with other agencies, jurisdictions, and purveyors to create and maintain utilities. Objective U-A: Provide an adequate level of public utilities in response to and consistent with land use, protection of the environment, and annexation goals and policies. Policy U-l. Utility facilities and services should be consistent with the growth and development concepts directed by the Comprehensive Plan. Policy U-2. Promote the collocation of new public and private utility distribution lines with planned or pre- existing systems (both above and below ground) in joint trenches and/or right-of-ways where environmentally, technically, economically, and legally feasible. Policy U-3. Process permits and approvals for utilities and facilities in a fair and timely manner and in accord with development regulations that encourage predictability. Policy U-4. Strive to protect the health and safety of Renton citizens from recognized harrnful effects of utility generated environmental hazards. Policy U-5. Encourage the appropriate siting, construction, operation, and decommissioning of all utility systems in a manner that reasonably minimizes impacts on adjacent land uses. Policy U-6. Where appropriate, encourage conservation in coordination with other utilities and jurisdictions. XH-2 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-7. Continue to encourage the coordination of non-emergency utility trenching activities and street repair to reduce impacts on mobility, aesthetics, noise, and other disruptions. Policy U-8. Continue to coordinate the construction and replacement of City-managed utilities with other public and private infrastructure, in order to minimize construction related disruptions and contain costs. Policy U-9. Where appropriate, work cooperatively with other jurisdictions to ensure that reliable and cost- effective utilities are available to meet increasing demands resulting from local and regional growth. Policy U-10. Where appropriate require reasonable landscape screening of site-specific aboveground utility facilities in order to diminish visual impacts. Policy U-ll. Identify utility capacity needed to accommodate growth prior to annexation. Do not annex areas where adequate utility capacity cannot be provided. City-Managed Utilities Discussion: The following general policies are designed to ensure that utility services are provided concurrently with new development. The policies are designed to prevent unplanned, disorderly land development, which can demand costly infrastructure upgrades and expensive temporary solutions. Annexation policies related to utility provision are intended to create a strong connection between land use and infrastructure implementation programs. City utility facilities expansion is intended to further the long-term development goals of the City rather than to promote extension of the utility system of a separate entity. Objective U-B: Provide and maintain safe, reliable and adequate utility facilities and services for the City's current and future service area to meet peak-anticipated demands of the City in an efficient, economic, and environmentally responsible manner. Policy U-12. Approval of development should be conditioned on utility systems with capacity to serve the development, without decreasing locally established levels of service being in place or with a financial commitment to provide service within a specified time frame. Policy U-13. Coordinate the extension of utility services with expected growth and development. Policy U-14. Apply level of service standards consistently throughout the service area for city-owned or managed utilities. If necessary, this level-of-service standard may be phased-in over time. Policy U-15. Preference should be given to capital facility improvements that will support the development and redevelopment of the Downtown, mixed-use centers, the Urban Center, and other high growth areas concurrent with anticipated growth. Policy U-16. Encourage the use of water and energy conservation technologies throughput the City. Policy U-17. Timely and orderly extension of City provided utility services (water, sanitary sewer, surface water, solid waste) should be provided within the City's existing and future service areas to meet public health and safety requirements. Policy U-18. Water, sewer, and storm water facilities and services should be in place prior to occupancy of development projects. XH-3 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-19. Implementation and coordination programs for the improvement, phasing and financing of water, sewer, and storm water infrastructure should be developed consistent with the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy U-20. All development should be required to pay an equitable share of construction costs for improvements to utility systems for water, sanitary sewer, and storm water necessitated by that development. When utility improvements will provide a general public benefit, the City may contribute funds for the construction of improvements to utility systems to support the public interest. Policy U-21. Upon annexation, if there is a threat to health and safety, the City may require upgrading of the deficient infrastructure as a condition of the annexation. Policy U-22. The City shall not be responsible for funding the immediate upgrading of utility systems located in annexed areas. At such time that the existing mfrastructure is replaced, upgraded or extended, the new infrastructure must conform to City of Renton standards. Policy U-23. When an annexation encompasses property served by a utility district, and that district continues to provide service, that district will be required to execute a franchise agreement with the City in order to operate within the City. Policy U-24. The owners of all properties, located in unincorporated portions ofthe Renton Planning Area and outside of municipal service areas, should agree to develop in accordance with specified City development standards, if granted City utilities. Exceptions would be allowed in the cases of threats to public health and safety. Policy U-24.1. The owners of all properties located in unincorporated King County that are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area (PAA) that receive City water services should be required to sign a covenant to annex. Policy U-25. Pursue future annexation of all lands that have recorded covenants to annex or that receive City water and sewer service using the 60% Assessed Valuation method of direct petition or other methods that allow for the enforcement of covenants not to oppose future annexation. Policy U-26. In the event of a threat to public health and safety, the City utilities may use utility resources to prevent or mitigate such threats. Non-City Managed Utilities Discussion: The following policies are designed to ensure Renton is aware ofproposed non-city managed utility facility upgrades and that utility purveyors are fully aware of the City's needs. Objective U-C: Ensure non-City managed utilities provide service commensurate with required state- mandated public service obligations and established safety and welfare standards. Policy U-27. Coordinate data exchange with utility planners for use with the City of Renton's geographic information system. Policy U-28. Upon renewal, all franchise agreements should be reviewed for compliance with the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan and the State of Washington Growth Management Act. xn-4 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-29. New telecommunications and electric utility distribution lines should be installed underground within the City where practical in accordance with rules, regulations, and tariffs applicable to the serving utility. Policy U-30. New or reconstructed structures, towers, and transmission lines should be designed to minimize aesthetic impacts appropriate to their surroundings whenever practical. Policy U-31. Coordinate periodic updating of the utility element and relevant implementing development regulations with adjacent jurisdictions and purveyors. Policy U-32. Encourage the exchange of information relevant to public and private planning processes. Policy U-33. Recognize and continue to allow existing utility facilities that may have regional significance within the City, consistent with the goals and policies of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan. Policy U-34. Ensure that development regulations are consistent with and do not otherwise impair the fulfillment of the serving utilities' public service obligations. xn-5 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Water Supply Background The Renton Water Utility is operated as a self-supporting enterprise utility under the direction of the Mayor and City Council. Operations are guided by policies of the City of Renton Comprehensive Water System Plan, 1998. (Update scheduled for adoption in 2005.) City of Renton Utility Service Area The City of Renton's Water Utility System provides service to an area approximately 16 square miles in size, and to more than 14,700 customer accounts (Figure 2-1). In addition, the City supplies water on a wholesale basis to the Bryn Mawr/Lakeridge Water District through a single metered connection. Boundaries of the water service area are defined by the City and approved by King County. The City's service area boundaries are not necessarily the same as the corporate boundaries ofthe City. Agreements between Renton and adjacent purveyors allow Renton to serve some areas outside ofthe city limits and provide for other districts to serve limited areas within Renton's corporate limit. Existing City Water Supply Facilities Within City Limits Current active and primary water supply sources include five wells drawing water from the Cedar Valley aquifer, three wells from the Maplewood aquifer and one artesian spring. The wells provide eighty-six percent (86%) of the City's water production. In addition, the City maintains seven metered backup water supply interties with Seattle Public Utilities, one emergency intertie with the City of Kent and one emergency intertie with the City of Tukwila. Water treatment consists of chlorination, fluoridation, and corrosion control. As a result of Renton's topography, Renton's service area encompasses twelve hydraulically distinct pressure zones. A system of booster pump stations and pressure reducing stations allow water transfer between zones. Currently there are eight reservoirs in the City's water supply system, strategically located to provide adequate equalizing and fire flow storage. Pressure reducing valves are used to supply lower pressure zones from higher- pressure zones that contain water reservoirs. Capacity of Existing Facilities City's active wells and Springbrook Springs currently provide 11,900 gallons per minute (gpm) or 17.14 million' gallons per day (mgd). The back up Maplewood wells and emergency well can deliver an additional 7,000 gpm or 10.08 mgd. Together, active, standby, and emergency wells provide 18,900 gpm or 27.22 mgd. Emergency interties with neighboring cities and water districts can provide 12,000 gpm or 17.28 mgd. The Washington State Department of Health has established guidelines for estimating the amount of supply necessary for adequate water supply. Based on composite growth forecasts, the City has sufficient on-line supply capacity to meet demands through at least 2020. Forecasted Conditions - City of Renton City of Renton Future Water Utility Service Needs The following forecasts are based on Puget Sound Regional Council projections, which have been allocated by the City of Renton, based on local assumptions. Expected increases in population will result in a total of 61,694 persons (or 26,940 households) living within the current city limits by the year 2010; and, 77,752 XH-6 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 persons (or 29,128 households) in the annexation area. The total forecast population of Renton's Planning Area is expected to be 139,446 persons (or 60,893 households) by 2010. The total projected maximum day demand by 2010 of about 19.9 mgd is anticipated and provided for in the adopted and approved 1998 Renton Comprehensive Water System Plan. The completion of the Maplewood wells, booster pump station and water treatment facility in 1998 should produce adequate quantities of water to accommodate projected growth, provided the City's existing supply is not lost through contamination or some other unforeseen event. City of Renton Future Source of Supply Water demand will continue to increase as the City's population grows. In response, the City has rehabilitated one emergency well in the Cedar Valley aquifer and developed three others on the Maplewood aquifer. If no other supply sources are developed, the additional supply from the three wells will adequately meet demands until at least 2020, xn-7 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Figure 2-1 Water System Plan | • 5 n> ±2 ' CO 'F >- Z > -S "t « ^ m < S g « .= ? -o ^ _J • 05 t§ f " § .2 a-a. • § s -5 § S ? W '.T) I ! 4 !j "I t— C K £ U £ S' *oioo; Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Discussion: Groundwater is Renton's primary source of drinking water. Nearly all ofthe City's water supply comes from the shallow Cedar Valley Aquifer andfrom Springbrook Springs. Development of groundwater supply has been successful in that it has provided substantial volumes of very high quality water. It is assumed that the potential for increased withdrawal rates is possible and that the aquifer is the City's best source of long-term water supply. The Cedar Valley aquifer is shallow and is covered by permeable material. Therefore, potential contamination problems exist from industrial, commercial, and residential development in the aquifer recharge area andfrom the transportation of contaminants through the aquifer area. Groundwater contamination would directly and immediately affect all Renton water customers. The Renton City Council has ranked aquifer protection as its number one priority, and it is the single most important issue in providing a reliable water supply to the service area. The City must assure that water supplies will be adequate to serve future growth. This can be accomplished through prudent use of current sources, the acquisition of new sources, and water reuse programs. In Renton, thousands of gallons a day of high quality drinking water are currently expended in applications for which reclaimed water is a possible substitute. The cost of treating effluent for reuse is generally less than acquiring and developing potable water supply for non-potable uses. Using reclaimed water also improves the quality of water bodies by reducing the amount of effluent discharged into them from wastewater treatment plants. Renton is integrating a reuse program into its water resource management program. The maximum level of sustainable draw from the City's groundwater system is not currently known. Therefore, it would not be prudent to commit Renton's potable water resources to supplying future growth in areas outside of Renton's present city limits when other service options are available. Obligating the City to provide unincorporated areas with water might impede annexations. This policy direction is not intended to preclude provision to neighboring areas prompted by emergency conditions. These policies will help the City ensure that adequate water supply is available to serve all portions of the municipal service area at adopted standards. Objective U-D: Provide, protect, and maintain a consistent, ample, and safe water supply for the City and future service areas. Policy U-35. Protect water resources to assure continued long-term, high quality groundwater and artesian spring water supplies. Policy U-36. Ensure that there is an adequate supply of high quality potable water to meet current and future water needs. Policy U-37. The intensity and type of development should be limited in the Aquifer Protection Area to those types of development that do not create adverse impacts on the aquifer. Policy U-38. Designate and protect areas of aquifer recharge within the City's Potential Annexation Area boundary. Policy U-39. Water supply sources (i.e. wells, and Springbrook Springs) should be protected from uses and activities that have been determined to be hazardous to these sources. Policy U-40. Continue to promote the efficient and responsible use of water through conservation and public education programs. XE-9 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-41. New alternative source supplies of potable water should be developed through wells or other sources. Policy TJ-42. The City's Water Utility will strive to meet maximum day demand during a reasonable "worst case" supply system failure. Policy TJ-43. Coordinate with the regional wastewater purveyor to develop programs to substitute reclaimed wastewater for potable water in landscape watering, heating and cooling buildings, and other safe uses, whenever practical. Policy U-44. The availability of adequate fire flow should be assured prior to the issuance of commercial or industrial building permits or the approval of residential subdivisions. Policy U-45. Allow extensions of water service without annexation, to areas outside of the city limits- 1) when such areas are within the City's water service area, or 2) when no other reasonable service is available AND it is determined by the City and/or State Department of Health that a public health emergency exists or is imminent. Policy U-46. Renton Water Utility will serve areas annexed to the City that do not have existing municipal supply. Policy U-47. Renton will not supply water to areas annexed with other existing municipal water suppliers and water districts. Policy U-48. Renton will use water service boundaries, established by agreement as a result of regional coordinated water system plans and agreements with neighboring cities and water districts. Policy U-49. Renton will follow state guidelines in assuming portions of adjacent water systems as a result of annexation. Policy U-50. Continue to actively participate in regional supply forums in order to reduce the cost of service and improve reliability, quantity and water quality. Policy U-51. Pursue the elimination of all supply from the Seattle Cedar River Transmission Pipelines, and supply all customers within the Water System's service area from the City's supply sources. However, the Seattle supply meters will remain operational to provide emergency supply if it is necessary. Policy U-52. Areas annexed with existing municipal water supply should be responsible for the costs of utility system improvements needed to raise the level of service to City standards. These upgrades may be phased over time if necessary. Policy U-53. The City may defer compliance with Renton Water Standards in the case of temporary or emergency water service. Policy U-54. Utilize water conservation and reuse programs to ensure adequate water supply to meet the essential needs of the community. Wastewater System Discussion: Septic systems are not appropriate means of providing wastewater service in urban or aquifer protection areas. Therefore, these policies support the provision of primary wastewater service through an extensive sanitary sewer system throughout the municipal service area. This system is intended to serve both XH-10 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 new and existing development in a manner consistent with planned land uses and at an appropriate level of service. Service by the sanitary sewer system should be in place at the time of development. Existing Conditions The Renton Wastewater Utility is operated as a self-supporting enterprise utility under the direction of the Mayor and City Council. Operations are guided by policies of the City of Renton Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan (current version adopted October, 1999). City of Renton Utility Service Area Renton's sanitary sewer service is provided by the City's Wastewater Utility. Portions of Renton are served by adjacent water and sewer districts, under interlocal agreements. Boundaries separating the City's sewer service area from adjacent districts have been agreed upon by the purveyors and the City. It has been Renton's policy to allow these districts to continue to serve areas after annexation by Renton until assumption of service to these areas is logical, in accordance with state law, and in the City's interest. Figure 3-1 shows existing service areas for Renton and adjacent districts. The City of Renton Wastewater Utility serves approximately 13,800 customers (residential and business) which includes approximately ninety-five percent (95%) of the City's population and eighty-five (85%) percent of the City's land area. The remaining five percent (5%) of the population currently uses private, on-site, wastewater disposal systems. General Description of Existing City Wastewater Facilities The City of Renton is divided into seven major wastewater collection basins, each of which consists of one or more sub-basins. For the most part, these collection basins and sub-basins follow the natural drainage patterns ofthe Renton service area. Where the collection basins do not follow the natural drainage patterns, it is typically due to lack of downstream facilities and the need to pump from a given point into an adjacent drainage basin. Renton's sanitary sewer system consists of about 184 miles of gravity sewers, 23 lift stations with associated force mains, and approximately 3,400 manholes. Wastewater is discharged to regional facilities (Kong County) at over 70 locations within the City's service area. The sewage is then conveyed to King County's South Plant at Renton. Currently, King County's wastewater treatment consists of primary treatment, secondary treatment, and bio-solids processing. Capacity of Existing City Wastewater Facilities Computer hydraulic modeling of the City's system has revealed that facilities in several basins are near capacity. These areas are addressed in the Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan and the Six-Year Wastewater Capital Improvement Program. Li addition, there is a capacity issue related to King County's handling of flows. During peak flows, King County will use its interceptors for storage of wastewater and for controlling flows in the South Treatment Plant in Renton. This results in wastewater backing up into King County interceptors. King County reserves the right to allow wastewater to back up in its interceptors to an elevation of 25 feet. Although King County has never reached this extreme, King County's storage of wastewater in its interceptors has caused Renton's sewers to surcharge (back up) in low-lying areas through manhole covers and back up side sewer connections into homes and businesses. xn-ii Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Reliability of Existing City Wastewater Facilities Problems associated with the City's gravity sewer system include the age of the system, improper construction or settlement, penetration by tree roots, and grease buildup. The 23 lift stations operated by the City pose a different kind of reliability problem. Unlike gravity sewers, lift stations are subject to power and mechanical failures, and thus are less reliable. They also require higher maintenance and operation costs and cause increased adverse impacts on downstream facilities. Some lift stations are in need of replacement because of age and deterioration. Other stations are in good shape, however, they lack some of the safety or reliability features required under current codes. XII-12 SANITARY SEWER SERVICE AREA AND ADJACENT DISTRICT BOUNDARIES Legsnd •-—» Metro Trunk Lines = City of Renton Interceptors Metro's East Division 'fj* Reclamation Plant CD- Adjacent District Boundaries i _} PAA Boundary. ,. City of Renton '..J Sanitary'Sewer Service Area 3 W to 1 n 2 to <"> '* = w- 8-5' • 3 'CD Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Forecasted Conditions Future Capacity of Facilities The wastewater collection system currently has no capacity restraints. However, continued development within the Lake Washington East Basin will require that additional capacity be provided by means of the Sunset Interceptor. These improvements are currently scheduled in the Wastewater Six-year Capital Improvement Program. The most significant amount of increased flow is anticipated to occur in the East Cedar River Basin. Sufficient capacity exists within this basin to accommodate this anticipated growth due to the construction of the East Renton Interceptor in the mid-1990s. Significant additional growth will also continue to occur within the West Cedar River, Black River, and Lake Washington West Basins. The current modeling of the system shows sufficient capacity to accommodate this growth as well. The utility is currently developing a new hydraulic model to update its modeling to fit recently completed flow analysis performed system wide as part of King County's Regional Inflow and Infiltration Study, scheduled for completion in early 2005. This update to the program will help the utility to better understand what, if any, additional capacity restraints may exist within its system. The City of Renton has several agreements with adjacent utilities that allow joint use of facilities within the City. Adjacent utility systems' comprehensive plans predict the future capacity they will need when they convey wastewater through Renton. However, adjustments to the City's interceptors may need to be made as these systems further clarify their needs. While these agreements restrict the volume of wastewater discharged to the joint use facilities, if wastewater flows from adjacent upstream utilities exceed the agreed upon flows, then capacity problems could occur. Reduction of inflow and infiltration in Renton's collection system will help to make additional capacity available for anticipated growth and development. This will also reduce King County's need to make expensive additions or improvements to increase the capacity of their treatment and conveyance facilities. King County's adopted wastewater plan, based on Puget Sound Regional Council population and employment projections, includes system improvements necessary to meet service levels in the area served by the regional wastewater conveyance system and treatment plant in Renton. Future System Reliability - City of Renton If proper attention is paid to the on-going inspection, maintenance, rehabilitation, and replacement of City mains, the reliability of Renton's sewer system is expected to remain at an adequate level. A significant portion of the City's wastewater collection and conveyance system is over fifty years old. The materials used for sewers at the time these were installed are expected to have a useful life of approximately fifty years. Some of these mains are in an elevated need of repair and are ranked high in priority in Renton's 20- year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The old mains are continually being inspected to determine which ones will need to be replaced during the second half of the 20-year CIP. Not all the fifty-plus year old mains are in the 20-year CP. Continual evaluation of these facilities may indicate the need to re-prioritize CIP projects and dictate the advancement of some programs to ensure the integrity of the system. The 2005 update of the Wastewater Long-Range Management Plan will further evaluate the priority of replacements. Proposed sewer projects are ranked according to a prioritization process based on defined needs. The ranking system, at this time, includes categories that give points for improving substandard or deteriorating facilities, increasing the efficiency ofthe system, and protecting the environment. xn-u Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Objective U-E: Provide and maintain a sanitary sewer collection system that is consistent with the public health and water quality objectives of the State of Washington and the City of Renton. Policy U-55. Ensure and encourage the use of the sanitary sewer system within urban areas in a manner consistent with land use and environmental protection goals and policies. Policy U-56. All new developments should be required to connect to the sanitary sewer system, except low- density single-family residential development located away from environmentally sensitive areas, outside of Aquifer Protection Areas, and having adequate soils to support on-site septic systems. Policy TJ-57. Sewer connections should be provided in presently unsewered areas if the areas, by remaining unsewered, pose a health hazard to the aquifer, or if other groundwater contamination occurs. Policy U-58. Adequate sewer service capacity should be assured prior to the approval of any new development application (e.g. short plat, long plat, multifamily, commercial, and mdustrial development). Policy U-59. Sewer service should be expanded so that the current levels of service are maintained through build-out of the adopted land use classifications. Policy U-60. Excess sewer capacity alone should not be sufficient grounds for challenging the existing zoning for an area. Policy U-61. Coordinate with the regional wastewater agency and adjacent jurisdictions in the planning and maintenance of regional wastewater systems in and near the City. Policy U-62. Development should be conditioned on the orderly and timely provision of sanitary sewers. Policy U-63. Coordinate with the regional wastewater agency and adjacent jurisdictions to ensure that wastewater lines passing through Renton are operated in a safe manner at all times. Policy U-64. The City of Renton will follow state guidelines that define a City's ability to assume facilities in annexation areas. Policy U-65. Areas annexed without existing municipal sanitary sewer service will be served by Renton unless a service agreement exists or is negotiated with a neighboring utility. Policy U-66. Areas annexed with existing sanitary sewer service must meet the City's sanitary sewer service objectives. Upgrading to City standards of sanitary sewer facilities within all or portions of newly annexed areas will be required if there is a threat to public health and safety. If improvements are necessary, they may be accomplished by developer installation or LTD as a condition of the annexation. Policy U-67. All property owners in unincorporated King County and Renton's PAA, who are granted City sanitary sewer services, should be required to sign a covenant to annex. Policy U-68. In areas where annexation is logical, extensions of service may be contingent upon request for annexation. (See Annexation policies in the Land Use Element.) Policy U-69. Allow the extension of sanitary sewer services within the City's Potential Annexation Area according to such criteria as the City may require. Sanitary sewer services will not be established within another sewer service district, which provides sanitary sewer service except by agreement with that sewer service district. XII-15 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-70. The City may assume existing portions of adjacent sanitary sewer systems, at the discretion of the City Council, when such assumptions promote the logical and efficient development ofthe City's sanitary sewer system area. Policy U-71. The City Council will consider annexations without assumptions of existing sanitary sewer facilities under conditions defined in the Long Range Wastewater Management Plan. Policy U-72. Actively promote all residents within the City to connect to public sewer. Policy U-73. Private sewage disposal systems will be allowed within the City limits, subject to city, county, and state regulations and when public sewers are not available. Surface Water Discussion: Natural hydrologic systems play, an integral role in effective surface water management. Engineering techniques can control much ofthe storm water through, detention and retention systems. However, the cumulative effects of storm water can only be managed by a combination of engineering and preservation of natural systems. Surface water can dissolve and transport toxins from the human environment as well as carrying eroded materials. Renton's municipal water supply, as well as downstream water bodies, must be protectedfrom water-borne contaminates through prudent management practices. Existing Conditions Renton's Surface Water Utility was organized to meet specific ordinances, regulations and to ensure that planned facilities meet defined engineering standards. The Utility is operated as a self-supporting utility under the direction of the Mayor and City Council. Utility Service Area The Utility's service area currently includes all lands within the City boundaries, more than 17.2 square miles. However, surface flows from the urban area within the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) and the rural area also affect the natural and constructed surface water management systems. This potential annexation area is currently serviced by King County. As areas within the PAA are annexed into the City, Renton will assume responsibility to provide surface water management services within the annexed areas'. General Location of Facilities The existing surface and storm water facilities follow natural drainage patterns wherein surface water is collected and detained to reduce peak runoff rates, to provide water quality improvement, and for infiltration. Alternatively, it is conveyed through pipes to numerous surface water bodies. These surface water bodies include several creeks and rivers, and Lake Washington. The major topographic elements of the service area include several major drainage areas or basins within the city limits (see Figure 4-1). The northern-most basin is the May Creek Basin, which begins northeast of the city limits and flows to Lake Washington. The Cedar River Basin runs through the heart of downtown Renton. This basin extends far beyond the city boundaries. Thus, hydrologic events and urban growth beyond the city limits may have a significant impact upon the surface drainage system, particularly near downtown and the outfall into Lake Washington. The facilities within the city limits for these basins include storm sewers, detention facilities, open channels, and other protective works. XH-16 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The Black River Basin, also know as the Eastside Green River Watershed (ESGRW), is a major basin in the southwestern portion of the City. The basin encompasses approximately 24 square miles that includes areas of Kent, Tukwila, and King County. Thus, coordination with other agencies in this area is essential. The City of Renton makes up less than one third of the total basin area. The facilities within the city limits for this basin include the Black River Pump Station, Springbrook Creek (P-1 channel), storm sewers, detention facilities, open channels, and other protective works. The remaining basins within the city limits include the West Hill Basin, which drains to Lake Washington, the Lower Empire Sub-basin in the Duwamish Basin, which drains to the Green/Duwamish River and the Soos Creek Basin. The Soos Creek Basin is primarily outside of the city limits. Basin plans for the Black River Basin, the Maplewood Sub-basin, the Cedar River Basin (with King County), and the May Creek Basin (with King County) have been completed and actions identified in these plans are being implemented. Existing Capacity of Facilities The existing surface water drainage system is meeting capacity requirements under normal conditions. However, in some areas ofthe City, the system has become inadequate to serve present needs during large, infrequent storm events. Of particular concern are inadequate facilities located within several basins. These basins are each affected by upstream development activities that have occurred in their respective watersheds, creating downstream capacity deficiencies. Currently there are no special efforts for floodway protection outside of the development review process and emergency responses during flooding. The City is studying frequently flooded areas including the Cedar River, North Renton, and the Black River Basin. Problems in the Black River Basin include widespread flooding or surface water ponding in the valley during severe rainfall events and the loss of outlet culvert capacity from the Panther Creek Wetlands. Existing and future surface water quality issues, loss of wetland habitat and fishery passage problems are additional concerns, with the continued development of the upstream portion of the watershed within Renton's Urban Growth Area and areas within the Cities of Kent and Tukwila. xn-17 SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE BASINS ' Legend Major Basin Boundary Sub -Basin Boundary PAA Boundary c 3. r-i C K. -tv 01 ia a • CD 1 r o O g > n m Z O tn cn M Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Other areas within the City with surface water problems include much ofthe Downtown and Rolling Hills vicinities. Storm drain facilities in areas along SW 7th Street, near the Renton Center, and Renton Village are over capacity during severe storm events causing flooding of facilities that are undersized for current flows from their tributary uplands. North of Downtown, both the Gypsy Creek and the North Renton Basins experience flooding caused, in part, by inadequately sized pipes, ditches and detention facilities. Flooding in the Gypsy Creek Basin is associated with facilities located near an interchange of 1-405. Flooding in the lower portion of North Renton is largely caused by the system not being able to convey drainage from the Highlands neighborhood. Existing Reliability To a large extent, the reliability of the storm drainage system depends on three factors. In areas where growth has occurred, or will occur, the facilities must be designed to control the flows that are discharged from new development to pre-developed conditions (detention), and conveyance systems that are sized to convey the increased storm water runoff due to future land use conditions. Additionally the facilities require regular maintenance to prevent debris and blockage, that impair the system's ability to function properly, and routine observation to ensure they operate as designed during high flows. Thus, reliability is a function of proper sizing of storm water conveyance systems and flow control systems, along with the need for routine maintenance and replacement of these storm water management systems. City facilities in the lower reaches of several watersheds no longer meet the capacity requirements and, in some instances, may not have been maintained on a regular basis. Thus, they may not be considered reliable. As part of the Surface Water Utility System Plan, a Capital Improvement Program (CP) has been developed to solve drainage problems and improve reliability; The Surface Water Utility System Plan also identifies maintenance and operation programs that are funded by the Utility to maintain public storm systems and address surface water management problems in the City. The Surface Water Utility has identified needed improvements through the basin plans. The current Surface Water Utility Six-year CP is provided in the City Capital Improvement Program document. Surface Water Quality and Quantity Best Management Practices to be Implemented to Mitigate Future Land Use Impacts The City adopts surface water management design standards that require the implementation of storm water quantity and quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) and controls as part ofthe approval of a project to mitigate the project's storm and surface water impacts during and after construction. These standards include erosion and sedimentation BMPs during construction, flow control, water quality treatment, and conveyance system sizing standards to manage the quantity and quality of storm water runoff from projects. The City has adopted the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual with City of Renton Amendments as the design standard that projects (new and redevelopment) must comply with to mitigate impacts to surface water. The City of Renton is a Phase 2 community under the Clean Water Act National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems. The NPDES program is intended to protect water quality from non-point source pollution from stormwater runoff. City will be required to obtain a NPDES Phase 2 stormwater permit from Ecology for its Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems in 2005, once Ecology completes development of the permit. The NPDES Phase 2 stormwater program requires the implementation of the following six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts 2. Public Involvement/Participation 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control XE-19 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 5. Post-Construction Stormwater Management in New Development and Redevelopment 6. Pollution Prevention/Good Housekeeping for Municipal Operations The Surface Water Utility currently implements these six minimum control measures to some degree. It is expected that the NPDES Phase 2 stormwater permit will require some expansion of these programs and the adoption of new design standards for construction projects that are equivalent to the standards in the Ecology 2005 Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington. The City has adopted wetland, stream buffer, steep slope, and flood hazard critical area ordinances, shoreline regulations and other development regulations that also protect surface water systems. The listing of Chinook salmon as threatened under the Endangered Species Act will require additional stormwater controls and strengthening of Critical Area Ordinances, updates to development regulations, and land use changes that will further reduce future land use impacts on streams, rivers, lakes, and wetlands in the City. The City currently operates a storm system maintenance program that includes cleaning catch basins, pipes and other facilities, along with a street vacuum sweeping program. The maintenance programs remove sediment and pollutants from City-owned and operated storm systems and streets, which reduces flooding and non-point source pollution from being discharged into water bodies in the City. Forecasted Conditions Future Utility Service Area The Utility's Service Area could enlarge substantially to approximately 35 square miles if the City of Renton annexes all areas within the Urban Growth Area. The areas that may be annexed are currently served by King County facilities. The City, upon annexation, would assume these facilities, their upkeep, and maintenance. General Location of Future Facilities The Renton surface and storm water system currently operates much like the gravity-based sewer system, although the destination is surface water bodies, rather than wastewater treatment plants. Storm and surface water facilities will generally remain in their current locations, although the individual sections may be replaced to convey higher flows. For new development, surface water facilities are usually constructed on a site-by-site basis, rather than on a comprehensive or system-wide basis. Storm water pipes and detention facilities will be constructed on-site during each construction project, and the off-site release rates should be limited to rates no greater than pre-development levels, per the King County Surface Water Design Manual. Most existing and new storm conveyance systems are constructed in public or private streets. Although peak flows are required to be regulated to pre-development levels, total volumes of flow will mcrease due to the increase in impervious area. New development may create negative downstream impacts although the development had complied with storm water controls and requirements due to the increase in runoff volume. The total volume of runoff will increase in all areas of new development, which may increase erosion and sedimentation and decrease surface water quality. The unincorporated urban area has existing storm water conveyance systems that are planned and administered by King County. The County land use plans for these areas are similar to the Renton plan. Since the King County facilities are designed with the same standards as City facilities, they function the same as City facilities. Future Capacity of Facilities xn-20 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Many of the existing facilities within the city limits will require modifications to increase capacity to provide adequate conveyance capacity and flow control (detention). All facilities would be sized to provide flow control and water quality treatment in accordance with the adopted city surface water design standards. Stormwater conveyance systems are required to convey storm flows from the twenty-five year or greater design storm event. New development is required to detain flows on-site in accordance with the adopted surface water design standards and to discharge the post construction runoff at rates no greater than pre-developed runoff rates. Basin plans will be prepared to determine need for and sizes of new regional drainage facilities. Several basin plans have been prepared and the City is also participating in regional salmon conservation planning within Water Resource Inventory Areas (WRIA) 8 and 9. As the City annexes new areas within unincorporated King County additional basin/sub-basin planning will be needed. In addition, the Surface Water Utility System Plan will be updated and will comprehensively define resources, standards, and programs needed to effectively manage storm and surface water runoff in the City and potential annexation areas. The anticipated increase in impervious surface in all areas will increase surface runoff and require new facilities at development sites, hi addition, new development, particularly infill development, may increase surface flows beyond existing facility capacity, requiring the enlargement of facilities downstream ofthe development. City standards require that new development mitigate for impacts to surface water by releasing runoff from the site at a rate no greater than the pre-developed runoff rate. Also, if downstream problems exist, new development is required to perform offsite analysis to ensure that the downstream problem is not made worse by the development. Surface Water Quality Requirements in Aquifer Protection Area Zone 1, Zone 1 Modified, and 2 Development projects located in either Zone 1, Zone 1 Modified, or Zone 2 of the Aquifer Protection Area (APA) are required to pass additional City review to ensure the projects do not produce water quantity and/or quality impacts that may affect the aquifer, which is used for the City's potable water supply. Areas of particular concern include areas subject to vehicular traffic or the storage of chemicals. The adopted Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan proposes areas for development of more intensive land uses by the year 2022. This includes substantial development and redevelopment ofthe Downtown. Portions of this area are within Zone 1 of Renton's APA. Zone 1 requirements include closed detention facilities including wet vaults on site, and pipe conveyance systems that meet pipeline specifications to prevent infiltration of storm water from these systems. APA Zone 2 and Zone 1 Modified requirements affect much of the northern and eastern portions of Renton. These requirements are not as stringent as Zone 1 requirements and generally require lining of conveyance system and water quality facilities to protect groundwater in areas with relatively porous soil. The APA regulations may increase the potential surface and storm flows generated from both zones, especially in Zone 1, since infiltration systems are not allowed. The increase in runoff may require existing facilities to be enlarged to meet the increased capacity need. Objective U-F: Provide and maintain surface water management systems to minimize impacts on natural systems and to protect the public, property, surface water bodies, fish habitat, and groundwater from changes in the quantity and quality of storm water runoff due to land use changes. Policy U-74. Design storm drainage systems to minimize potential erosion and sedimentation problems, and to preserve natural drainage systems including rivers, streams, flood plains, lakes, ponds, and wetlands. XII-21 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-75. Encourage the retention of natural vegetation along lakes, ponds, rivers, and streams, where appropriate, in order to help preserve water quality, protect fishery resources, and control erosion and runoff. Policy U-76. Filling, culverting, and piping of natural watercourses that are classified as streams shall not be allowed, except as needed for a public works project. In the case where a public works project requires the filling, culverting, or piping of a natural watercourse, if no other option is available, then such projects should follow specific design standards to minimize impacts to the natural watercourse. Such standards should prevent flooding and the degradation of water quality, aquatic habitat, and the effectiveness of the local natural drainage system. This would include providing mitigation to replace the lost functions provided by the natural watercourse that is filled, culverted, or piped by the public works project. Policy U-77. Promote and support public education and involvement programs that address surface water quality and other surface water management issues. Policy TJ-78. Encourage the safe and appropriate use of detention and retention ponds, biofiltration swales, clean roof run-off, and groundwater recharge technologies to reduce the volume of surface water run-off, to recharge aquifers, and to support base flows in streams for aquatic resources. Policy U-79. Work towards protecting surface water resources and groundwater resources from pollutants entering via the storm drainage system. Policy U-80. Implement stormwater standards that adequately control flow (quantity) and quality of stormwater runoff from new and redevelopment projects to protect public health and safety, prevent property damage, prevent erosion, and protect surface water quality, groundwater quality, and fish habitat. Policy U-81. Coordinate with adjacent cities, counties, and state and federal agencies in the development and implementation of the Clean Water Act's National Pollution Eliminating System Phase 2 Permit for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems. Policy U-82. Existing natural drainage, watercourses, ravines, and other similar land features should be protected from the adverse effects of erosion from increased storm water runoff. Policy U-83. Storm and surface water management programs should be coordinated with adjacent local and regional jurisdictions. Solid Waste Discussion: These policies support the provision of adequate and safe waste handling and disposal facilities. In addition, these policies support active recycling efforts aimed at extending the life cycle of these facilities xn-22 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Existing Conditions Utility Service Area Solid waste collection within the city limits is mandated by state and city code and only the City's contractor may provide such service. The City sets rates for solid waste collection, and bills all customers directly for these services. The City contracts with Waste Management-Rainier for all solid waste collection within the city limits. State law also gives Renton the authority to contract for collection of residential recyclables and yard waste. Curbside collection of recyclables is available to all single-family and duplex residents of the City, and onsite collection is available to all multi-family and duplex residents fourplex and above). Yard waste collection is available to all single-family and duplex residents with the exception of mobile home park residents. Yard waste collection may be available to multi-family and mobile home residents for an additional fee. Waste Management, Inc. provides collection containers for all of these programs. The recycling and yard waste collection programs are voluntary. The City contracts with Waste Management, Inc. for these services. Coordination with Other Solid Waste Purveyors Through an interlocal agreement with King County, the County's disposal system handles all solid waste generated within city limits, except solid waste diverted by waste reduction or recycling activities. King County regulates the types of waste accepted at its facilities as well as the disposal rates. Renton's interlocal agreement with King County also authorizes the County to prepare the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan and to include the City in the Plan. The County achieved its 1995 goal of fifty percent (50%) waste reduction and recycling under the Plan. Renton works cooperatively with other jurisdictions in the region to implement the Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan (LHWMP). Participants in the LHWMP include thirty-eight (38) suburban cities, the City of Seattle, King County Solid Waste Division, King County Water and Land Division, and the Department of Public Health, Seattle-King County. The LHWMP provides a regional program to manage hazardous waste generated in small quantities by households and businesses in King County. To provide funding for the LITWMP, the City of Renton and all other solid waste and sewer service providers in King County, collect hazardous waste fees from customers through utility bills. Regional Solid Waste Purveyors within the City Limits The King County Solid Waste Division owns and operates the Renton Transfer Station in the 3000 block of NE 4th Street in the Renton Highlands neighborhood. Local waste haulers and residents of unincorporated King County who haul their own waste use this facility. City residents also use this facility for disposal of large and bulky items. Due to state legislation and Washington Utilities and Trade Commission (WUTC) regulations, the City does not have the authority to contract exclusively for collection of recyclable materials generated by businesses. However, a number of private companies do collect recyclables from businesses in Renton. Location and Capacity of Existing Solid Waste Facilities There are three existing solid waste facilities within the City's Planning Area: a King County Transfer Station, the Cedar Hills Landfill, and the Black River Construction, Demolition, and Land Clearing Transfer Station (CDL). King County's Renton Transfer Station is located in the Renton Highlands. A majority ofthe solid waste generated in Renton is transported there by the City's contractor, Waste Management, Inc. A majority of the vehicles that utilize the Transfer Station are garbage trucks from waste hauling companies. Xn-23 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Regional Disposal's Black River Transfer and Recycling Center (a Rabanco facility), located at 501 Monster Road SW, opened in late 1993. Under a contract with King County, this facility accepts construction, demolition, and land clearing waste. The facility received 89,300 tons of CDL material in 1999. There is no data on the amount of CDL processed at construction sites and hauled directly to a processor. Therefore, it is difficult to determine the amount of CDL waste being diverted from the facility. The City of Renton recognizes that the Mt. Olivet Landfill (closed 1991) was not closed in accordance with State of Washington closure standards. Areas of deficiency include excessively steep slopes, lack of adequate capping, possible negative environmental consequences, failure to obtain an approved closure plan, and other related deficiencies. The City continues to monitor groundwater quality in the vicinity of the landfill to assure that potential contaminants do not enter the City's dririking water aquifer. If contamination is detected, the City has contingency measures to address this problem, such as selective operation of the City's eight wells and groundwater pumping to remove contaminants. Identified areas of contamination would be monitored until the contaminants are removed. King County's Cedar Hills Landfill, owned and operated by the King County Solid Waste Division, and located southeast of Renton, will continue to receive all solid waste generated in the City of Renton. This facility's remaining permitted capacity is approximately 12.5 million tons (as of January 2000). At the current level of fifty percent (50%) waste reduction and recycling, Cedar Hills will be able to accept solid waste until 2012. Recyclables collected from single family, duplex, and multi-family residents in the City are taken to Waste Management, Inc.'s Cascade Recycling Center in Woodinville, WA. Yard waste for single-family and duplex residents in the City is currently taken to Cedar Grove Recycling in Maple Valley. Their yearly capacity is 195,000 tons of organic material. Currently, the facility handles approximately 172,000 tons annually. Cedar Grove is permitted by the Seattle-King County Health Department to have 250,000 cubic yards of organic material onsite. The City's residential yard waste collection program has diverted increasing amounts of the residential waste stream every year, successfully diverting over 30% in 2001, and more than seven percent (7%) of the City's total waste stream annually since it began in 1989. Yard waste makes up only 0.9 percent of the remaining residential waste stream; therefore any increase in diversion would be minimal. Food waste makes up almost thirty-five percent (35%) ofthe residential waste stream after recyclables and yard wastes are diverted. The Solid Waste Utility implemented a pilot food waste composting program in 1994 and 1995 to assess the feasibility of diverting this material from Renton's residential waste stream. Worm compost bins were delivered to approximately 200 residents and weekly measurements were made on their waste practices. This led to a period of several years in which residents could obtain a worm bin from the city for the purpose of residential food waste composting. Reliability of Existing Solid Waste Services and Facilities The services of the City's solid waste and recycling collection contractor, Waste Management, Inc., have been very reliable since the inception of the program in 1989. The number of missed collections has remained consistently low. Contingency plans for collection are provided in the solid waste contract in the event of extreme weather conditions. Interruption of service due to a contract dispute is not likely because the City has completed negotiations of a new contract with Waste Management, Inc. The new contract terminates at the end of 2005, but has the potential to be extended with two 2-year extension options. At this time, the capacities of the Renton Transfer Station and the Cedar Hills Landfill are sufficient, and any regulatory issues are being addressed by the appropriate agency. XE-24 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The capacity of the Cascade Recycling Center for processing recyclables and the capacity of Cedar Grove Recycling for composting yard wastes are both adequate to meet the City's needs. Forecasted Conditions Future Utility Service Areas The City's Solid Waste Utility will continue to provide solid waste collection to all residents and businesses within the city limits. Curbside collection of recyclables and yard waste will continue to be available to all single-family and duplex residents in Renton. Multi-family residences continue to be eligible for on-site collection of recyclables. Yard waste collection will continue to be offered to mobile home parks and multi- family complexes for an additional fee. When annexations take place, the franchise hauler in the annexed area has authority to collect solid waste for a period of up to seven (7) years. After seven years, the City's contractor may take over service in the.annexed area. The City's contractor should be able to increase solid waste, recycling, and yard waste collection service to households and businesses as needed. Since King County has planned for both incorporated and unincorporated areas in the County, disposal facilities are anticipated to be adequate should the City annex areas of unincorporated King County. Location and Capacity of Future Facilities Currently, King County plans to keep the Renton Transfer Station operational and to install a compactor by 2012, at a cost of $4,000,000. This date coincides with the projected closure of the Cedar Hills Landfill, and will enable the facility to prepare waste for transport to a new location. Transportation of noncompacted waste costs approximately 1.5 times more than the cost of hauling compacted waste. Therefore, the installation of the compactor should minimize any necessary rate increases caused by the greater distance between the transfer station and a new facility. King County's Final 2000 Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan suggests that a study be made of the possibility of privatization of the transfer system. The City of Renton is concerned that this may limit market competition in the private sector. The City is also concerned that ending public ownership of transfer facilities will limit the City's influence over rates and service levels. King County's Cedar Hills Landfill is the last regional landfill located in the County. While the diversion rate by City residents has risen sharply in the past ten years (diverting 58.6 percent as of July 2001), the overall quantity of waste has also risen, and Cedar Hills is scheduled for closure in 2012. Under the 2000 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, the King County Solid Waste Division is exploring waste export possibilities. After the Cedar Hills closure, it is likely that solid waste will be exported outside the County. Waste Management, Inc.'s Cascade Recycling Center will continue to receive Renton residents' recyclables as long as the City contracts with Waste Management, Inc. for collection. To increase their overall processing capacity, Waste Management Inc. has diverted paper generated in North King County and South Snohomish County from the Seattle plant to its Woodinville transfer station for processing. This change has allowed the Seattle plant to handle more recyclable material generated in South King County. The amount of yard waste collected through the City's program is not expected to increase significantly. Therefore, capacity at the Cedar Grove composting facility in the County should be sufficient to meet future needs. Xn-25 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Coordination with Other Purveyors The interlocal agreement between the City of Renton and King County, which designates the County's disposal system for the disposal of all solid waste generated within city limits, remains in effect through June 30, 2028. Either party may request review and/or renegotiation of the agreement every five years. It is anticipated that the City will coordinate with the County to negotiate a new interlocal agreement upon the expiration ofthe existing agreement. Interlocal Agreements Chapter 70.95 RCW requires the County to regularly update the Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan (the Plan). According to the provisions of the City's interlocal agreement with King County, this update will occur every three years The City will be included in future Plan updates, and representatives ofthe City will continue to be involved in the Plan update process. The Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan (LHWMP), in which the City of Renton participates,'follows a five-year update schedule as required by Chapter 70.105 RCW. The first update occurred in 1995. The City will continue to work cooperatively with other jurisdictions and agencies involved in the LHWMP to implement programs to manage hazardous wastes generated in small quantities from households and businesses in King County, including the collection of hazardous waste fees from City solid waste customers. Reliability Annexations to the City and the closure of the Cedar Hills Landfill are not expected to have a significant impact on the ability ofthe City's contractor to provide reliable solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection services. If changes within Waste Management, Inc. affect the ability of their company to provide services to City customers, the City has the ability to renegotiate the contract, or enter into a contract with another service provider. Depending on regional regulations, the yard waste composting facility at Cedar Grove, may have problems handling significant increases in the amount of organic waste collected in the future. However, the City does not anticipate this to happen. Objective: U-G: To provide a responsible, comprehensive waste management program that includes economic efficiency, environmental sensitivity, and responsiveness to the needs of the community. The City should pursue a reduction ofthe overall waste stream, recycling, and long-term waste handling and disposal solutions. Policy U-84. Provide and maintain an adequate system of solid waste, recycling collection, disposal, and handling to meet existing and future needs. Policy U-85. Coordinate with regional agencies in planning for the facilities and services necessary for solid waste collection and disposal, including the siting of regional transfer and waste handling facilities. Policy U-86. Reduction ofthe waste stream should be supported and promoted for all residential, commercial, and industrial uses within the city (i.e. through programs and public education including recycling, composting, re-use, and energy recovery programs that meet environmental standards). Policy U-87. Where economically feasible and legally acceptable, citywide collection of recyclable materials should be supported and promoted. XH-26 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-88. The proper handling and disposal of solid waste should be required to protect public health and safety. Policy U-89. Contamination of land, air, and water should be minimized or eliminated. Policy U-90. Coordinate with agencies in the region on educational and other programs for the safe management and disposal of hazardous household wastes. Policy U-91. Support products and practices that offer safe and effective alternatives to the use of potentially hazardous substances in order to reduce the total amount of hazardous waste. Policy U-92. Actively support the creation of markets for products made with recycled materials. Policy U-93. Actively support regionally coordinated efforts that promote producer responsibility and environmental stewardship. Electrical System Existing Conditions Background Three purveyors distribute electricity to and within the Renton Planning Area: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Seattle City Light (SCL), and Puget Sound Energy (PSE). BPA is the regional administrative entity ofthe U.S. Department of Energy. Seattle City Light is a publicly owned utility serving Seattle and environs. Puget Sound Energy is a private, investor-owned utility that provides electrical service to approximately 1 million customers in the Puget Sound region. These three utilities are part of an integrated transmission grid that connects points of production and demand and permits inter-utility exchange of power across the region. To make this possible, the various elements of the individual systems were designed to function compatibly with the facilities of other network utilities. High capacity transmission lines also allow inter-regional and international power transfers to compensate for seasonal, region-wide variations in generation and demand. BPA owns and operates most ofthe major transmission lines and substations located throughout the Pacific Northwest. The agency sells transmission services on the high capacity grid to customers throughout the region. Additionally, BPA markets electricity generated by federal hydroelectric projects and the Washington Public Power Supply System. Puget Sound energy, Seattle City Light, and other utilities purchase power and transmission services from BPA as local situations warrant. Electricity is retailed to customers in the Renton Planning Area by Puget Sound Energy and, to a lesser extent, by Seattle City Light. For both utilities, the primary generation facilities are located outside their service areas. Puget Sound Energy supplements these sources with power generated and/or purchased within its greater service area. Each utility schedules electrical generation to meet anticipated local demand loads with excess production sold elsewhere on the power grid. Existing Utility Service Area Puget Sound Energy is the principal provider of electrical service within the Renton city limits, as well as most ofthe remainder ofthe Renton Planning Area. Electricity is provided to the Bryn Mawr and Skyway portions of the Renton Planning Area by SCL. xn-27 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 General Location of Facilities Electrical facilities can generally be divided into generation, transmission, and distribution functions. Transmission lines are identified by voltages of 115 kilovolt (kV) and above, distribution facilities have less than 55,000 volts (55 kV), and a distribution substation transforms voltages of 115 kV or greater to feeder circuits at lower voltages of 12 or 34 kV. Within the Planning Area, BPA operates transmission facilities, Seattle City Light operates transmission and distribution facilities, and Puget Sound Energy engages in all three functions. Renton's geographic position offers a logical location for transmission routes. Five BPA transmission circuits follow the Rocky Reach-Maple Valley right-of-way, which enters the Planning Area from the east, just south of the Cedar River, and terminates at BPA's Maple Valley Substation. The lines, two 500 kV, one 345 kV, and two 230 kV, originate at BPA facilities north, south, and east of Renton. As electrical service provider to most of the Planning Area, Puget Sound Energy builds, maintains and/or operates various facilities. These include high voltage transmission lines for bulk power transfers, substations for system monitoring and control and changing of voltage levels, and lower voltage feeder lines to carry the electricity to the consumers. The high capacity lines energized at 230 kV and 115 kV feed out from the Talbot Hill Station, which receives power from the adjacent BPA Maple Valley Station. From Talbot Hill these lines carry power to other transmission stations or to distribution substations where the voltage is stepped down for entry into the feeder system. The portion of Renton's Planning Area currently served by Seattle City Light is small, containing only two minor distribution substations, Bryn Mawr and Skyway. Power is provided to these substations by Seattle's Creston distribution substation. In addition, several Seattle City Light rights-of-way pass through the City and the Urban Growth Area. These circuits include: The Bothell-Renton Right-of-Way (ROW), with one of two SCL 23 0 kV lines currently in use and leased to Puget Sound Energy. The Renton-Creston ROW, with six 230 kV lines. The Cedar Falls ROW, with one 115 kV line. Capacity/Reliability of Existing System Puget Sound Energy and Seattle City Light are both capable of meeting the current electrical load in their respective service areas. Puget Sound Energy operates eleven distribution substations in the Renton Planning Area with a total nameplate capacity of 284,400 kilowatts (kW). The residential/commercial peak load utilization factor for these substations is 87.5%. SCL's Creston substation is outside the Planning Area, but supplies power within it. Creston's capacity is 106,000 kW and has a utilization factor of 81%. The utilization factor, or the load to capacity ratio, is normally maintained in the 75% to 85% range. Leaving excess capacity under normal conditions allows a reserve for periods of extraordinary load during extreme cold weather, and for system diversity. The capacity of individual elements is not the sole consideration in evaluating an electrical system, however. Our dependence on electrical power is such that the overall grid and the constituent utilities must continue to furnish power even with the failure of individual components. XE-28 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Electric service interruptions are most frequently a product of extraordinary circumstances. Either an unusual load has overtaxed an element of the system or it has been weakened or removed by some external condition or event. Any such occurrence could cut off an area from the grid and/or endanger other parts ofthe system by a sudden transfer of power from one conductor to another of insufficient capacity. To mitigate these threats to the system, redundant lines and facilities of adequate capacity are necessary. This diversity is programmed to meet reliability criteria, which assume a failure of one or two components of a system (single or double contingency) with no loss of customers or damage to equipment. Forecasted Conditions- Electrical Forecasted increases in population would result in 135, 161 persons and 91, 874 jobs, within the Planning Area, by 2010. Based on these forecasts the Renton Planning Area will have an additional load of 147.3 MVA, excluding industrial load increases, at the extreme winter peak in 2010. Industrial load additions will comprise some part of the 82.3 MVA increase that Puget Sound Energy anticipates for Renton industrial consumers by 2020. Future Capacity of Electrical Facilities To assure system reliability and to provide the capacity necessary to accommodate the growth anticipated for the Renton Planning Area, SCL, BPA, and PSE have planned for upgrades and additions to their respective systems. Puget Sound Energy has prepared a King County Draft GMA Electrical Facilities Plan. According to this plan, the utility has several system improvements in progress within the Renton Planning Area that are necessary to serve forecasted load growth for the next thirty years. Puget Sound Energy's plans for future transmission lines, facilities, and upgrades will increase system capacity and reliability. Also proposed is the Aqua substation. This substation may or may not be located within the City's Urban Growth Boundary, but in either case would likely serve residents both within and outside of the urban growth boundary. Existing SCL 4 kV lines are being replaced with a new 26 kV network. The Bryn Mawr and Skyway substations will no longer be needed and will be taken off-line when this upgrade is complete. Additionally, SCL has indicated the possibility of adding two 230 kV transmission lines from BPA's Covington Substation to South Seattle on existing transmission line corridors to serve load growth within the next twenty years. The BPA has plans to increase reliability by installing additional 500 kV circuits and 500 kV to 230 kV transformers. While these will benefit Renton, they are not within the Planning Area. The only project that BPA currently has planned for inside the Planning Area is a static VAR for the Maple Valley Station. This device senses increased load and signals the capacitors to release stored energy. Conservation & Demand Management Conservation is one means to reduce loads, existing or projected, on the electric system. This can delay the need for new or expanded generation and transmission facilities. System wide, Puget Sound Energy expects that conservation will yield an additional 296 average MW and 592 MW on system peak in the year 2010. Conservation programs are enacted on a utility-wide basis and regulated by the WUTC. While conservation reduces overall electrical consumption, demand-side management influences when the demand will occur. Educating consumers to modify their consumption patterns, imposing a sliding rate structure for time-of-day and for increment of energy used, or directly controlling energy use by certain customers, can all serve to spread the load throughout the day. Since electric utility systems are designed to accommodate peak loads, this method can delay the need for additional capacity. XII-29 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Objective U-H: Promote the availability of safe, adequate, and efficient electrical service within the City and the remainder of its Planning Area, consistent with the utility's regulatory obligation to serve. Policy U-94. The provision of electricity to the City's Planning Area should be coordinated with local and regional purveyors to ensure the availability of electricity to meet projected growth in population and employment. Policy U-95. Encourage purveyors of electrical power to make facility improvements/additions within existing electric facility corridors where appropriate. Natural Gas and Fuel Pipelines Existing Conditions - Natural Gas Background Natural gas is a mixture of hydrocarbon and non-hydrocarbon gases extracted from porous rock formations below the earth's surface. The gas makes its way from the producing fields via the interstate pipeline at high- pressures, often over one thousand pounds per square inch (psi). Colorless and odorless as it comes off the interstate pipeline, a powerful odorant, typically mercaptan, is added for safety purposes to make leaks easier to detect. Through a series of reduction valves, the gas is delivered to homes at pressures of from 0.25 to 2 psi. In recent decades, the residential popularity of natural gas has risen. Cleaner burning and less expensive than the alternatives, oil and electricity, it has become the fuel of choice in many households for cooking, drying clothes, and heating home and water. Natural Gas Utility Service Area Puget Sound Energy provides natural gas service to approximately 650,000 customers in the Puget Sound Region, including Renton and its Urban Growth Area. General Location of Natural Gas Facilities Puget Sound Energy operates under a franchise agreement with the City of Renton, which allows PSE to locate facilities within the public street right-of-ways. The gas distribution system consists of a network of high-pressure mains and distribution lines that convey natural gas throughout the Planning Area. Natural gas is provided to PSE by the Northwest Pipeline Corporation, which operates a system extending from Canada to New Mexico. Two parallel Northwest Pipeline Corporation high-pressure mains enter the Planning Area south of Lake McDonald and terminate at the South Seattle Gate Station. PSE high-pressure mains then extend to smaller lines branching-off from the primary supply mains. Through a series of smaller lines and pressure regulators the gas is delivered to consumers. PSE also operates an underground propane storage facility. Capacity of Natural Gas Facilities Although PSE serves most of Renton and its Urban Growth Area, a portion of the Planning Area, west ofthe " Renton Municipal Airport, and straddling SR-900 is currently not served by Puget Sound Energy. Provision of natural gas service to this area would only require extension of intermediate service lines. XII-30 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 The capacity of the system is primarily constrained by the volume of gas entering the PSE network from the Northwest Pipeline Corporation mains. Current capacity of the South Seattle Gate Station, the point of entry for natural gas to the area, is nine million standard cubic feet per hour (scfh). This can serve approximately 180,000 residential customers. The minimum pressure at which gas can be delivered is fifteen pounds per square inch (15 psi). Methods for increasing supply to a particular area include replacement ofthe lines, looping, installing parallel lines, and inserting higher-pressure lines into greater diameter, but lower pressure mains. A reserve of natural gas supply is maintained in order to respond to temporary shortfalls in the natural gas supply due to weather-driven higher demand or supply interruptions. A number of separate utilities share the facility, however, and hence it is not dedicated to the Renton Planning Area. Natural Gas System Reliability Since natural gas is chiefly used as a home heating fuel, demand rises as the outdoor temperature drops. The locally available gas supply and the capacity of PSE's delivery system may not always be sufficient to provide product to all customers during periods of exceptional demand. Therefore, PSE has several short term, load- balancing strategies. As stated previously, PSE operates a storage facility that provides a reserve of additional gas for times of shortfall. Also, some gas customers are served under an interruptible service contract. For those times when gas resources become limited, these connections can be temporarily dropped from the system. Residential customers are always granted first priority for available gas supply. Another strategy to maintain system pressure is the looping of mains. Feeding product from both ends of a pipeline decreases the possibility of localized pressure drops and increases system reliability. Forecasted Conditions Puget Sound Energy predicts a growth rate of 41.2% in demand for this 20-year planning horizon. According to this assumption, demand for gas will average 1,227,562.6 cubic feet per hour for December 2010 within the Renton Planning Area. PSE has stated that they will be able to accommodate this increased demand. This will be accomplished through an upgrade of the South Seattle Gate Station to allow the entry of an additional two million scfh into the system, for a total capacity of eleven million scfh. The backfeed from Covington will add another three million scfh and, with the current peak hour feed of one million scfh from Issaquah, there will be sufficient supply capacity to serve the customer base anticipated for 2010. Proposed New or Improved Facilities There is one high pressure main proposed to meet the increased gas demand, which should result from the forecast growth. The ultimate placement of the line will be based on right-of-way permitting, environmental standards, coordination with other utilities, and existing infrastructure placement. PSE has a policy to expand the supply system to serve additional customers. Gas connections are initiated by customer requests. Maximum capacity of the existing distribution system can be increased by the following methods: increasing distribution and supply pressures in existing lines, installing parallel mains, replacing existing with larger sized mains, looping mains, and adding district regulators from supply mains to provide additional intermediate pressure gas sources. XII-31 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Petroleum Fuel Pipelines Existing Conditions Utility Service Area Olympic Pipeline Company is a joint-interest company that provides a variety of fuel oil products via a system of pipelines throughout the region. The stock is held by Atlantic Richfield Corporation (Arco), Shell, and Texaco oil companies. Olympic transports oil products from the Ferndale British Petroleum (BP) refinery, the Cherry Point Arco refinery, and the Anacortes Shell and Texaco refineries through Renton to Seattle, Sea-Tac International Airport, and points south to Portland, Oregon. Olympic's Renton facilities function as a regional distribution hub, as well as supplying the local market with petroleum products. General Location of Fuel Product Pipelines and Other Facilities The Olympic Pipeline Company's facilities in the Renton Planning Area include a system of pipes, varying from 12 to 20 inches in diameter, and a central monitoring station at Lind Avenue SW. Petroleum products enter Renton via two pipes from the City's northern border, and then extend south and west to the Renton Station. From here, a 12-inch main heads north, eventually intercepting the City of Seattle Skagit Transmission Line right-of-way toward Seattle. Two parallel branches also extend westward to the Green River, at which point one line heads west to Sea-Tac Airport and one turns south to serve Tacoma and beyond. Renton Station is the monitoring and control center for the entire pipeline network. Here, also, oil products are transferred to trucks for distribution. Capacity of Fuel Product Pipelines and Facilities The Olympic Pipeline Company currently carries an average of approximately 270,000 barrels of product per day, varying according to the transported material. The absolute capacity of the system is over 350,000 barrels. As the primary supplier of petroleum products to Western Washington, Olympic states that system capacity is sufficient to meet current demand. Forecasted Conditions Olympic, though not directly serving City of Renton, affirms that they can and will increase the capacity ofthe system to accommodate a demand commensurate with the expected population and land uses anticipated by 2020 in the Renton Planning Area. Aside from laying new pipelines, options for increasing capacity include introducing drag reducing agents to the petroleum products, increasing the horsepower of the pumps, and replacing individual sections of pipe where bottlenecks tend to occur. Objective U-I: Promote the safe transport and delivery of natural gas and other fuels within the Planning Area. Policy U-96. Coordinate with local and regional purveyors of natural gas for the siting of transmission lines, distribution lines, and other facilities within the Renton Planning Area. Policy U-97. Support cost effective public programs aimed at energy conservation, efficiency, and supplementing of natural gas supplies through new technology. Policy U-98. Allow for the extension of natural gas distribution lines to and within the city limits and Urban Growth Area, provided they are consistent with development envisioned in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Xh-32 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Policy U-99. Require that petroleum product pipelines are operated and maintained in such a manner that protects public safety, especially where those facilities are located in the Aquifer Protection Area. Telecommunications Telecommunications: Conventional Telephone, Fiber Optic Cable, Cellular Telephone, and Cable Television Existing Conditions - Conventional (Wireline/landline) Telephone Utility Service Area - Conventional Telephone Service to Renton and its Planning Area is provided by Qwest Communications, Inc (formerly US West). Qwest is an investor-owned corporation, whose holdings include companies serving regional, national, and international markets, including telephone services to 25 million customers in 14 western states. The subsidiaries include directory publishing, cellular mobile communications and paging, personal communications networks, cable television, business communications systems sales and service, communications software, and financial services. All cities within the State of Washington fall within a particular Local Access and Transport Area (LATA). These LATAs are telephone exchange areas that define the area in which Qwest is permitted to transport telecommunications traffic. There are 94 exchanges within Washington where Qwest provides dial tone and other local services to customers. General Location of Conventional Telephone Facilities Telephone service systems within Renton and its Planning Area include switching stations, trunk lines, and distribution lines. Switching stations, also called "Central Offices" (COs), switch calls within and between line exchange groupings. These groupings are addressed uniquely by an area code and the first three digits of a telephone number. Each line grouping can carry up to 10,000 numbers. Renton has 14 of these groupings. Four main "feeder" cable routes generally extend from each CO, heading to the north, south, east, and west. Connected to these main feeder routes are branch feeder routes. The branch feeder routes connect with thousands of local loops that provide dial tone to every subscriber. These facilities may be aerial or buried, copper or fiber. Local loops can be used for voice or data transmission (such as facsimile machines or computer modems). A variety of technologies are utilized including electronics, digital transmission, fiber optics, and other means to provide multiple voice/data paths over a single wire. Methods of construction are determined by costs and local regulations. Capacity of Conventional Telephone Facilities Capacity of a CO is a function of the type of switch employed. Advances in technology and the use of digital transmission provide for increases in switch capacity to meet growth. Reliability of the Conventional Telephone System Telephone service is very reliable with the exception of extraordinary circumstances such as severe weather events or natural disasters. In many cases, the system may still be operational, but the volume of calls being placed to and from the affected area creates shortfalls in service. In Renton, the Inauguration Day windstorm of XII-33 AtiachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 January 1993 resulted in some system outages. Generally, following a catastrophic event, public telephone systems would be restored before service to individuals and businesses. Forecasted Conditions- Conventional Telephone Forecasted Capacity of Conventional Telephone Facilities Ample capacity exists in the Renton CO to accommodate growth projected in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Recent technological advancements have resulted in consolidation of equipment at the Renton CO. Several additional floors are available in the building housing the CO for future expansion ofthe system. Line facilities within the Planning Area would require some upgrading, but no new buildings would be needed to meet projected growth. Regulations governing telecommunications require that the purveyor provide adequate telecommunication service on demand. Upgrading facilities and constructing new facilities accommodate growth. New technology is employed to enhance service, when available and practical. Enhancements necessary to maintain adequate capacity are determined through regular evaluation of the system. Qwest has confirmed that they will be able to extend timely service to all current and new subscribers anticipated in the population forecasts for the Renton Planning Area. Existing Conditions - Fiber Optic Telecommunication systems Utility Service Area -Fiber Optic Telecommunications The Starcom Service Corporation, a Washington corporation of the Canadian Starcom International Optics Corporation of Vancouver, B.C. plans to locate facilities within the City of Renton Planning Area. The system is a "carriers carrier" and is not intended to connect with individual users in the City of Renton. Services are to be leased to other telecommunications purveyors. The cable based telecommunications system will provide a telecommunication link between Vancouver B.C. and Seattle. General Location of Existing Fiber Optic Telecommunications Facilities As of this writing, no Starcom fiber optic facilities are in place in Renton. However, the company is currently engaged in the permitting required to bury cable within the 100 foot wide Burlington Northern Railroad right- of-way, about four feet below ground. The line generally follows the eastern shore of Lake Washington from the northern city limits to the Boeing facility, and then roughly parallels 1-405 until it intersects with 1-5. Forecasted Conditions- Fiber Optic Telecommunications Systems Forecasted Capacity of Fiber Optic Telecommunications Facilities According to Starcom, the proposed fiber optic cable and latest technology regenerative equipment will provide capacity to meet growth envisioned in the City's Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Existing Conditions - Cellular Telephone XII-34 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Background - Cellular Telephone Cellular system technology works on the principle of reusing radio frequencies. The same radio frequency can be reused as long as service areas do not overlap. In this way, shorter antennas can be used and located on top of existing structures, rather than constructing freestanding towers. Siting of cellular facilities depends on how the system is configured. The cell sites must be designed so that channels can be reused, because the FCC allocates a limited number of channels to the cellular telephone industry. As cell sites were initially developed, a few large cells were established using hilltops or tall buildings to site transmission and receiving antennas. This allowed for maximum coverage ofthe large cell. Clusters of smaller cells have since replaced the larger configuration, diminishing the need for larger antennas. Thus, shorter antennas and poles provide coverage for the smaller cell sites. This division of cells will continue to occur as the demand for cellular service grows. Eventually, cell sites will be placed less than two miles apart with antennas situated on poles about 60-feet high, or the height of a four-story building. Cell sites are located within the center of an area defined by a grid system. Topography and other built features can affect signal transmission, so the cell is configured to locate the cell site at an appropriate place to provide the best transmission/reception conditions. Sub-cells are sometimes created because natural features such as lakes, highways or inaccessible locations prevent siting within the necessary one-mile radius from the ideal grid point. Preferred cell site locations include: existing broadcast or communications towers, water towers, high rise buildings, vacant open land appropriately zoned that could be leased or purchased, and areas with low population densities to diminish aesthetic impacts. When new antenna structures are required for the cell site, monopoles or lattice structures are often utilized. Monopoles generally range in height from 60 feet to 150 feet. The base of the monopole varies between 40 to 72 inches in diameter. Monopoles are generally more aesthetically acceptable, but changes in the system such as lowering of antennas are not possible without major changes. Lattice structures are either stabilized by guy wires or self-supported. Generally, the maximum height of a lattice structure is limited to between 200 and 250. feet. Guyed towers can be built to accommodate a greater height, but the guy wires can pose navigational problems to migrating birds and aircraft. In addition, the taller towers often are perceived to have more severe aesthetic impacts. All structures require that a six to eight foot separation occur between antennas for signal reception. This is. termed "system diversity" and is needed on the reception antennas in order to receive an optimal signal from the mobile telephone. Utility Service Area - Cellular Telephone Cellular telephone service is licensed by the FCC for operation in Metropolitan Service Areas (MSA) and Rural Service Areas (RSA). The FCC grants two licenses within each service area. One of those licenses is reserved for the local exchange telephone company (also referred to as the wireline carrier). Qwest Cellular (NewVector) holds the wireline licenses in the Tacoma, Seattle, Bellingham, and Spokane MSA. The non-wire line licenses, in these areas, and also in the Yakima MSA is held by McCaw Cellular Communications (Cellular One). Recently, Cellular One merged with AT&T. Existing Capacity of Cellular Telephone Facilities Forecasting for cellular facilities is accomplished using a two-year horizon. Information regarding current and future predicted number of subscribers is considered by the purveyors to be proprietary, and no data was furnished in this regard. However, statewide customer counts total approximately 250,000, with the number XH-35 AttachmentC ORDINANCE NO. 5612 anticipated to increase to several million by the year 2010. It is predicted that by the period covering the years 2005 to 2010, approximately twenty percent (20%) of the population in Washington State will be served. Reliability of Cellular Telephone Facilities Cellular communications are considered to be more reliable than conventional telephone systems because they can continue to operate during electrical power outages. Each cell site is equipped with a back-up power supply, either a battery or generator, or combination of the two. Severe weather events or natural disaster conditions have validated the use of cellular telephones on numerous occasions throughout the country. When conventional telephone systems fail, or telephone lines are jammed, cellular calls have a better chance of being completed. Forecasted Conditions- Cellular Telephone Future Capacity of Cellular Telephone Facilities As previously stated, forecasting for new cellular facilities uses a relatively narrow time frame of two years. Expansion is demand driven. Raising the density of transmission/reception equipment to accommodate additional subscribers, cell splitting, follows rather than precedes increases in local system load. Therefore, cellular companies must maintain a short response time and a tight planning horizon. Existing Conditions - Cable Television Background - Cable Television Cable television or CATV (Community Antenna Television) originated with small-scale attempts to obtain a clear television signal in areas too remote or too obstructed to receive one via the airways. Dating from the 1940s, the early systems were constructed of surplus wiring and basic electronic hardware. Subsequent technological innovations in signal transmission have increased the number of available channels and permitted the emergence of new players in the television broadcast industry. The multiplicity of channels and the ability to direct the signal to specific addresses have opened up both niche and global markets to information and entertainment purveyors. In addition to the provisions of cable television services, advancements in technology have allowed the current purveyor to provide high speed access to Internet services with the provision of additional features expected as market demands dictate. Utility Service Area - Cable Television The current purveyor holds a cable television franchise to serve the City of Renton. The service area includes the entire incorporated area ofthe City, expanding with annexations. All residential neighborhoods within the City are currently served. Service is still unavailable in some commercial areas due to market conditions, which presently preclude line extension. General Description and Location of Cable Television Facilities The current purveyor's facilities supplying Renton with cable television service are composed of a receiver, a headend, a trunk system and a feeder system. The receiver and the headend, which amplifies, processes and combines signals for distribution by the cable network, are located north of Burien, Washington. The signal is then transmitted via low-power microwave to a site in Kent, Washington, where it enters the trunk system. Amplifiers placed at intervals along the cables maintain signal strength. The amplifiers also serve as junction points where the feeder system taps into the trunk cables. Service drops then provide the final connection from the feeder line to the subscriber. XH-36 Attachment C ORDINANCE NO. 5612 Generally following street rights-of-way, the present network encompasses residential neighborhoods to the east, north, and south. The unserved portion of Renton generally includes the commercial and industrial areas located in the Green River Valley. Capacity of Cable Television Facilities A cable system is not subject to the same capacity constraints as other utilities. Providing and maintaining the capacity to serve is the contractual responsibility of the utility. According to the City's franchise agreement, the purveyor must make service available to all portions of the franchise area. In some circumstances, costs associated with a line extension may be borne by the service recipient. The current purveyor offers various packages including as many as 130+ active analog and digital television channels plus nearly 40 digital music channels, and has the capacity to greatly increase those numbers as well as the other types of services that they may decide to offer in the future. Forecasted Conditions - Cable Television. According to the provisions of the current purveyor's franchise agreement with the City, the company must continue to make cable service available upon request, when reasonable, for any property within the current or future city limits. Therefore, under the current terms of this franchise, the current purveyor would be required to provide cable service to projected growth within the City and the remainder ofthe Planning Area. Objective U-J: Promote the timely and orderly expansion of all forms of telecommunications services within the City and the remainder of its Planning Area. Policy U-100. Require that the siting and location of telecommunications facilities be accomplished in a manner that minimizes adverse impacts on the environment and adjacent land uses. Policy U-101. Require that cellular communication structures and towers be sensitively sited and designed to diminish aesthetic impacts, and be collocated on existing structures and towers wherever possible and practical. Policy U-102. Pursue the continued development of a wireless Internet communication grid throughout the City for the use and enjoyment of Renton residents, employees, and visitors. Policy U-103. Encourage healthy competition among telecommunication systems for provision of current and future telecommunication services. Sunset Area Community Utility Capital Improvements The City of Renton studied potential infrastructure improvement needs to support growth anticipated in the Sunset Area Community Planned Action EIS in 2010-2011. The planned action neighborhood study area is generally bounded by NE 21st Street on the north, Monroe Avenue NE on the east, NE 7th Street on the south, and Edmonds Avenue NE. Utility capital improvements were identified in the EIS for water, wastewater, and surface water utilities. These improvements would be needed within the 2011-2030 time frame. The project costs and funding sources for these projects are identified in the Sunset Area Community Capital Facilities Plan found within the City's Capital Facilities Element. xn-37