HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 5242CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO.5242
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON,
DESIGNATING A PLANNED ACTION FOR SUB-DISTRICT I-B OF THE
BOEING RENTON PLANT PROPERTY,AN APPROXIMATELY 51
ACRE PARCEL BOUNDED BY LOGAN AVENUE N.,GARDEN
AVENUE N.,NORTH 8TH STREET,AND 6TH STREET.
WHEREAS,RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164,-168,and -172 allow and
govern the application of a Planned Action designation;and
WHEREAS,an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)entitled the "Boeing Renton
Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS"has been prepared to study the impacts of redeveloping a
portion of Boeing's Renton Plant property;and
WHEREAS,the EIS analyzed the potential environmental impacts of mixed-use
development on that portion of the Boeing Renton Plant known as Sub-District 1-B (see Exhibit
A);and
WHEREAS,by Ordinance No.5026,the City has amended the Comprehensive Plan
Land Use Map for the Boeing Renton Plant from Employment Area -Industrial (EA-I),
Employment Area -Transition (EA-T)and Employment Area Office (EA-O)to Urban Center
North (UC-N);and
WHEREAS,by Ordinance.No.5027,the City has amended the Zoning Map for the
Boeing Renton Plant from Center Office Residential (COR)and Commercial Office (CO),to
Urban Center North 1 (UC-Nl);and
WHEREAS,in 2003,the City and Boeing entered into a Development Agreement based
on the analysis in the EIS,which is recorded under King County recording number
20031210001637 ("Boeing Development Agreement");and
1
ORDINANCE NO.5242
WHEREAS,on November 7,2005,the City approved a Conceptual Plan for Sub-
District I -B ("IB Conceptual Plan"),attached as Exhibit B;and
WHEREAS,an Environmental Consistency Analysis has been prepared for Sub-District
IB,which compares the proposed IB Conceptual Plan to the range of development alternatives
analyzed in the EIS;and
WHEREAS,this Ordinance designates certain land uses and activities within Sub-
District I-B as "Planned Actions"that are consistent with the Urban Center North 1 (UC-Nl)
designation and zone;
NOW,THEREFORE,THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,
WASHINGTON,DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I.Purpose.The City of Renton declares that the purpose of this
ordinance is to:
A Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions within Sub-District I-B
as "Planned Actions"consistent with state law,RCW 43.21C.031;and
B.Provide the public with an understanding as to what constitutes a Planned Action
and how land use applications which qualify as Planned Actions within Sub-District I-B will be
processed by the City;and
C.Streamline and expedite future land use permit review processes for development
in the Sub-District I-B area that is consistent with the IB Conceptual Plan by relying on existing
detailed environmental analysis for this area.
SECTIONll.Findings.The City Council finds that:
2
ORDINANCE NO.5242
A.The EIS addresses all significant environmental impacts associated with the
scenarios described in the EIS for Alternatives 1,2,3,and 4 as referenced therein,and the IB
Conceptual Plan is encompassed by and consistent with those Alternatives;and
B.The mitigation measures contained in the Boeing Development Agreement,
together with the City's development standards,and standard mitigation fees (Parks,Fire and
Traffic),are adequate to mitigate any significant adverse environmental impacts of the proposed
IB Conceptual Plan;and
C.The expedited permit review procedure set forth in this Ordinance is and will be a
benefit to the public,will protect the environment,and will enhance economic development;and
D.Opportunities for public involvement have been provided as part ofthe
Comprehensive Plan redesignation,the Boeing Plant rezone,the EIS,and the Conceptual Plan
review and approval process for Sub-District I-B.
SECTION III.Designation of Planned Action;Procednre and Criteria for
Evaluating and Establishin.g Projects as Planned Actions.
A.Planned Action Designated.The Planned Action designation shall apply to the
Sub-District I-B site,as shown on Exhibit A,and associated off-site improvements.Uses and
activities described in the IB Conceptual Plan,attached as Exhibit B,subject to the thresholds
described in Alternatives 1,2,3,and 4 analyzed in the EIS,and subject to the mitigation
measures required by City Codes or contained in the Boeing Development Agreement,are
designated Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031.Additionally,the Planned Action
designation shall apply to any off-site improvements necessitated by the proposed development
on Sub-District IB,where the off-site improvements have been analyzed in the EIS.
3
ORDINANCE NO.5242
B.Environmental Document.A Planned Action designation for a site-specific
permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the EIS.The
Development Agreement,together with existing City codes,ordinances,standard mitigation fees,
and standards,shall provide the framework for a decision by the City to impose conditions on a
Planned Action project.Other environmental documents incorporated by reference in the EIS
may also be utilized to assist in analyzing impacts and determining appropriate mitigation
measures.
C.Planned Action Review Criteria.
1.The Director of Development Services,or the Director's designee,is
hereby authodzed to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW
43.21C.031(2)(a),if the project application meets WAC 197-11-172 and all of the following
conditions:
a)The project is located on Sub-District I-B,or is an off-site
improvement directly related to a proposed development on Sub-District I-B;and
b)The project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan
adopted under RCW 36.70A;and
c)The Director has determined that the project's significant
environmental impacts have been adequately addressed in the EIS by reviewing the
environmental checklist or other project review form as specified in WAC 190-11-315;and
d)The project complies with the Planned Action threshold described
in this Ordinance;and
e)The Director has determined that the project's significant impacts
have been mitigated through the application of the Boeing Development Agreement,as well as
4
ORDINANCE NO.5242
other City requirements,standard mitigation fees,and conditions,which together constitute
sufficient mitigation for any significant environmental impacts associated with Sub-District I-B
development;and
1)The proposed project complies with all applicable local,state and
federal regulations,and where appropriate,needed variances or modifications or other special
permits have been requested;and
g)The proposed project is not an essential public facility.
D.Effect of Planned Action.
1.Upon designation by the Director that the project qualifies as a Planned
Action,the project shall not be subject to a SEP A threshold determination,an environmental
impact statement (EIS),or any additional review under SEPA.
2.Designation as a Planned Action means that a proposed project has been
reviewed in accordance with this Ordinance,and found to be consistent with the development
parameters and environmental analysis included in the EIS.
3.Planned Actions will not be subject to further procedural review under
SEPA.However,projects will be subject to conditions designed to mitigate any environmental
impacts which may result from the project proposal,and projects will be subject to whatever
permit requirements are deemed appropriate by the City under State and City laws and
ordinances.
4.Amendments of the approved Sub-District IB Conceptual Plan may be
approved administratively,so long as such amendments remain consistent with the spirit and
intent ofthe adopted Plan.For development of Sub-District IB qualifying as a planned action
pursuant to this Ordinance,a proposed amendment of the Sub-District IB Conceptual Plan is
5
ORDINANCE NO.5242
consistent with the adopted Plan's spirit and intent if such amendment does not exceed the
maximum development parameters analyzed in the EIS.If amendments of the approved Sub-
District IB Conceptual Plan exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed in the EIS,
supplemental environmental review may be required under the SEPA rules.
E.Planned Action Permit Process.
The Director shaH establish a procedure to review projects and to determine whether they
meet the criteria as Planned Actions under State laws and City codes and ordinances.The
procedure shaH consist,at a minimum,of the following:
1.Development applications shall meet the requirements of RMC Chapters
4-8 and 4-9.Applications shall be made on forms provided by the Department and shall include
a SEPA checklist or revised SEPA checklist [where approved through WAC 197-11-315(2)]or
such other environmental review forms provided by the PlanninglBuilding/Public Work
Department The checklist may be incorporated into the form of an application;
2.The Director shall determine whether the application is complete as
provided in RMC Chapter 4-8.
3.If the project application is within Sub-District 1-B,the application shall
be reviewed to determine whether the proposed application is consistent with and meets all of the
qualifications specified in section III of this Ordinance.
4.Upon review of a complete application by the City,the Director shall
determine whether the project qualifies as a Planned Action.Ifthe project does qualify,the
Director shall notify the applicant,and the project shall proceed in accordance with the
appropriate permit procedure,except that no additional SEPA review,threshold determination,
or EIS shall be required.
6
ORDINANCE NO.5242
5.Public notice for projects that qualify as Planned Actions shall be tied to
the underlying permit If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit,the notice shall
state that the project has qualified as a Planned Action.If notice is not otherwise required for the
underlying permit,no notice is required.
6.Ifa project does not qualify as a Planned Action,the Director shan notify
the applicant and prescribe an appropriate SEP A review procedure consistent with City SEP A
procedures and state laws.The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the
application that result in disqualification as a Planned Action.
7.Projects disqualified as a Planned Action may use or incorporate relevant
elements of the EIS,as well as other environmental documents to assist in meeting SEPA
requirements.The Environmental Review Committee may choose to limit the scope of the
SEPA review to those issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the EIS.
SECTION IV.Validity Period.This Planned Action Ordinance shan be
reviewed no later than December 31,2016,by the Development Services Director to determine
its continuing validity with respect to the environmental conditions ofthe subject site and
vicinity and applicability of Planned Action requirements.Based upon this review,the
Ordinance may be amended as needed,and another validity period may be specified.
SECTION V.Conflict.In the event of a conflict between the Ordinance or any
mitigation measures imposed pursuant thereto and any other ordinance,or regulation of the City,
the provisions ofthis Ordinance shall control,EXCEPT that provision of any Uniform Code
shall supersede.
SECTION VI.Severability.Should any section,subsection,paragraph,sentence,
clause or phrase ofthis Ordinance or its application be declared unconstitutional or invalid for
7
ORDINANCE NO.5242
any reason,such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance
or its application to any other person or situation.
SECTION VII.
five days after publication.
This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage,approval,and
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 11 t h day of __D_e_c_e_m_b_e_r_----',2006.
Bonnie 1.Walton,City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 11 t h day of_...-.-::::.D...;:e:...:::;c:...:::;e=m..::;.b=e;:;...r ,2006.
;z;as to form
...~2W~
Lawrence J.Warren, City Attorney
Date ofPublication:12/15/2006 (summary)
ORD.1321:12/6/06:ma
8
o
ORDINANCE NO.5242
ExhIbit A
ORDINANCE NO.5242
THE BOEING COMPANY
CONCEPTUAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
SUB-DISTRICT I-B
Submitted to the City ofRenton
October 3,2005
Exhibit B
ORDINANCE NO.5242
CONCEPTUAL REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Sub-District I-B
Renton,Washington
Background
The Boeing Company has been working with the City of Renton since early 2003 to
evaluate potential redevelopment strategies associated with its 737 facility in Renton,
Washington (the "Renton Plant Site").In December 2003,The Boeing Company and
The City of Renton entered into a Development Agreement that established certain roles
and responsibilities for the potential phased redevelopment of all or a pOliion of the
Renton Plant Site,including:
II Renton commitments to fund and construct certain public infrastructure
improvements;
..Boeing commitments to fund certain private aspects of redevelopment;and
II Boeing corrunitments to complete Conceptual Plans when it elects to subdivide,
develop,sell,or otherwise alter any prope11y for uses not related to airplane
manufacturing.
Per the tenus onhe Development Agreement,Conceptual Planning was anticipated to
occur incrementally,and would be completed for three discrete areas of the Site,known
as Sub-Districts I-A and I-B,and District 2 (see Exhibit I).City Council approved
Boeing's Conceptual Plan for Sub-District I-A in December 2003 and amended it in
October 2004.Boeing subsequently sold this portion of the Site to Harvest Partners in
December 2004.
Harvest Partners is currently refining its development plan for Sub-District J-A,which is
also sometimes referred to as both Lots 1-4 and Lakeshore Landing.Harvest Partners'
preliminary planning anticipates the development of an urban retail center containing
approximately 800,000 square feet of retail,with the potential for additional hotel,office
space and multifamily residential units.Construction ofthe retail project is anticipated to
begin in 2006.
Sub-District I-B
Suh-District I-B is located immediately to the south of Lakeshore Landing,as illustrated
on Exhibit 2,and totals approximately 50.7 acres,net of that portion which has been
reserved fOf the extension of a four-lane 8th Avenue between Logan and Park A venues.
As is outEtl'ed within the 2003,Development Agreement,.the construction of two new
lanes along this segment of 8 th is necessary to support the redevelopment of Sub-District
I-B (see Exhibit 3).
Page I of9
October 3,2005
ORDINANCE NO.5242
The City of Renton is currently completing its design for this segment of glh Avenue,and
expects to begin building at least the two northern-most lanes in March,2006,
simultaneous with the other infrastructure improvements necessary to support the
redevelopment of Suh-District I-A.Ultimately,two additional lanes (to the south)along
this same segment of 8th will be required to support the redevelopment of District 2.
Harvest Partners has a Right ofFirst Offer to purchase a portion of the Sub-DistJict
which totals approximately 21.2 acres (see Exhibit 3).Harvest Partners has indicated
their interest in developing this portion,known as the ROFO area,with retail uses that are
complementary with the proposed development of Sub-District I-A as an urban retail
center.The development intent of the ROFO area as depicted with this Conceptual
Redevelopment Plan is based upon feedback from Harvest Partners as to their proposed
project and from The City of Renton as to their goals for redevelopment within the Urhan
Center North.
The remainder of Sub-District I-B contains approximately 29.5 acres and is described
herein as the "Boeing Remainder",as illustrated on Exhibit 2.Portions of the Boeing
Remainder are currently improved with office buildings that Boeing owns and will
continue to utilize as part of on-going airplane manufacturing plant operations.
Interspersed between these existing office buildings are approximately 12.85 acres of the
Boeing Remainder that have been identified as potential development parcels ("DP 1"
through "DP 4")within this Conceptual Plan.
Submittal
Included within this submittal are a narrative description of Boeing's proposal for Sub-
District I-B,a Conceptual Planning Diagram,and two economic benefit analyses
demonstrating a range of potential one-time and recurring revenues generated by:
(1)Development illustrated within the Planning Diagram on the ROFO portion of the
Sub-District (beginning in 2007);and
(2)Development illustrated within the PlalU1ing Diagram on the Boeing Remainder
(beginning in 2007 for DP I and in 2016 for DP 2 -DP 4).
Boeing seeks the City's approval of this Conceptual Plan so that it can complete a
Binding Site Plan creating additional lots,and finalize negotiations with Harvest Partners
relate.d to the acquisition of the ROFO portions of the Sub-District.The timing of a land
surplus decision by Boeing or redevelopment associated with the majority of the Boeing
Remainder (with the exception ofDPI)is not cun'ently envisioned to occur sooner than 5
to 10 years in the future.
Page2 of9
October 3,2005
.'.i.:.
ORDINANCE NO.5242
'f.
'~'.
...."
·,"·S.
ORDINANCE NO.5242
FULLER SEARS
ARCHITECTS
CONCEPTUAL PLAN
SUB-DISTRICT 1-8 ~OEING
.';~(36q.OO(tS}=
.T01'Al),;
.:~UPPORT€PiW
.EXIST.PARKING'
GARAGE
NOTE:
IAAX.lWO
G-STORYBlDGS.
IFOFFlCE
(300.000 Sf)
WITH NBtt 2~STORY
PARKiNG GARAGE
F'l.3;,
tiJ~~gNEEhSmHY
W;B£LOO.
(~80'ooPSF)W/~H~ED'
PARKING IN.DP-2lSA\ilA~E .
~1~g.:
e.$TORYllUlK·
IFD,EF.lCE.
/1?Q.001i'SF):.,'ilirih'EW,
P.<!GAAAGE
np~2
t',jAX.TWO
6i$'r<DRY
;V'BBl.:DG$.
.(360.000 SF
r:ptAl)
·~bt;E
fIj@yBlOO.
IFOfF1CE
(i1pXlOO'SF).
R RETAIL
{'--.-
.'.
L LAB
a OFFICE
P PARKING GARAGE
MF MULTI·FAMILY--PEDESTRIAN
CONNECTIONS
ORDINANCE NO.5242
Conceptual Development Plan
The Conceptual Plan for Sub-District I-B is comprised of two somewhat distinct parts.
The ROFO area makes up the northern portion of the property along 8thAvenue,has been
identified as surplus by Boeing operations,and is available for near-tem1 redevelopment.
The Boeing Remainder makes up the southern portion of the Sub-District,and contains
660,000 square feet of existing office space with re-use potential and approximately
]2.85 acres ofland with future redevelopment potential.
ROFO Area
Boeing recognizes that high-quality retail development is essential to the successful
transition of the area from its industrial roots to the City's vision for the Urban Center-
North.Harvest Partners and the City are both committed to ensming that the
development at Lakeshore Landing is well-designed and initiates redevelopment of a
quality and at a scale which is consistent with the City's long-term vision for the area.
As planning for Lakeshore Landing has progressed,the land south of 8th has been
identified as an important component of the overall project.The area,known as the
ROFO portion of Sub-District l-B,has been illustrated within this Conceptual Plan as an
integral part of the retail development planned to the North.
The ROFO portion of the Sub-District is envisioned to contain a large format
"destination"retailer located along Logan Avenue,with supporting retail shops space
concentrated along both sides of Park Avenue.Generally,the large format retail
development (users with footprints of 50,000 square feet or larger,and building heights
up to 45 feet)is planned to occur along 8th and Logan,facing eastward toward Park
A venue.The supporting retail shops space would include a mixture ofmedium fonnat
retailers (ranging between]0,000 and 50,000 square feet in area,with building heights up
to 40 feet)and some component of smaller,specialty retail shops overlooking Park
Avenue.
The Plan anticipates pedestrian connections to occur internally within the site both east
toward Park Avenue,and south toward 6 th Avenue.Vehicle access would occur off of
Park Avenue,with loading and delivery functions relying upon Garden Avenue and ail
internal service road running along the southern edge of the ROFO property line.
At a maximum lot coverage ratio of 30%,the ROFO site could accommodate up to
270,000 square feet of retail space.Harvest's current planning anticipates a total of
225,000 to 230,000 square feet,comprised of a 135,000 -140,000 square-foot large
format retailer located along Logan,and 85,000 to 90,000 square-feet of shops space.
Parking is located in well-organized surface parking lots,with primary pedestrian
entrances facing inward or directed toward Park Avenue.
A small portion of the site,containing a data hub for the Boeing Plant,needs to be
retained by Boeing for the foreseeable future.It can be accommodated along the
Page 5 of9
October 3,2005
ORDINANCE NO.5242
southern portion of a mid-block parking field without having a negative impact on the
surrounding retail uses.
Summary
Redevelopment ofthe ROFO parcel as envisioned within this Conceptual Plan meets
many of the City's vision and policy statements for the Urban Center-North,which call
for "retail integrated into pedestrian-oriented shopping districts."This site is located
within District],where the City identifies its first objective as follows:
"Create a major commercial/retail district developed with uses that add significantly to
Renton's retail tax base,provide additional employment opportunities within the City,
attract businesses that serve a broad market area and act as a gathering place within the
community."
Boeing Remainder
This portion of the plan is significantly influenced by the presence of four,]980s-vintage
office buildings that are located throughout (the 10-13,10-16,10-18 and ]0-20
buildings).Each structure is 5 -6 stories in height,ranging between 160,000 and
]70,000 square feet.Parking is accommodated in separate,structured garages and in
surrounding surface lots,at an overall ratio of 4.5 stalls per],000 square feet.Boeing
currently utilizes these four buildings and anticipates no near-term changes that would
result in significant rehab or sale ofthe structures.
In additionto the existing office buildings,there is also a']960s-vintage lab building,
known as the 10-71 building,located along Logan Avenue.Although the condition of
the building and the planned widening of La gall A venue may impact its potential re-use,
Boeing and the City are interested in exploring viable adaptive re-use opportunities.To
illustrate the potential capacity for redevelopment within the Conceptual Plan,the ]0-71
building has been.assumed to be demolished,creating a 4.9-acre development parcel
between Logan Avenue and the 10-20 building (DPt).However,Boeing would like to
retain the flexibility of considering either re-use of the existing stnlcture or
redevelopment in the future.
We have assumed that the existing office buildings remain,but could be suppOIied in the
future by parking at a market-driven ratio of 3.5 stalls per 1,000 square feet,rather than at
Boeing's more conservative rate.As a result,surplus parking stalls exist within the three
existing parking garages,and three additional development parcels are created:a 3.9-acre
site between the 10-18 and ]0-20 buildings (DP2);a 1.8-acre site on the west side of Park
A venue north of 6th (DP3);and,a 2.2-acre site on the west side of Garden Avenue north
of 6th (DP4).
Page 6 of9
October 3,2005
ORDINANCE NO 5242
DPI
This 4.9-acre parcel is located along Logan Avenue,immediately south of the ROFO
property.Fronting on 6th Avenue,it is also adjacent to the J0-20 office building and
associated parking structure.Given its location and near-term redevelopment potential,
the Plan envisions its redevelopment as either a mid-rise,multifamily project or,
potentially,a retail development ancillary to that anticipated on the ROFO piece.If,
instead,the existing building were re-used,it is envisioned that it would be of interest
either as a cost-effective research and development or contract manufacturing facility.
With the demolition of the existing structure,the DP-I site could support a significant
multi-farnily,project,either incorporated in one or more stories above ground-floor
retailers,Of developed at higher densities as a single use project.A five-to six-story
residential project,developed at densities of 110 units per acre,would be both consistent
with the residential development currently planned at Lakeshore Landing and compatible
with the surrounding uses.At this higher density;approximately 535 units could be sited
on DPl.
Alternately,redevelopment ofthe DPI parcel could accommodate up to 65,000 square
feet ofretail space at a 30%lot coverage ratio,taking the form of additional medium-
format and small,specialty shops space backing up against Logan.Although access
would most likely occur off of 6thAvenue,the development ofDP1 could be integrated
with the larger retail development occurring.on the ROFO parcel.
DP2andDP4
These two parcels are both infill opportunities that exist when parking requirements for
the existing office buildings are reduced.Currently undemtilized and serving for the
most part as overflow parking areas for Boeing employees,the Plan envisions their
redevelopment with 6-story office or lab buildings,consistent with the current
development pattern.
In some instances where new lab development is platUled,surplus parking within existing
garages could fully support new development,and allow for the creation of new,private
open spaces or campus greens within the neighborhood.In order to create this surplus
parking opportunity,the Plan assumes either that the four existing Boeing office
buildings are sold to other users with market-based parking requirements or that Boeing
provides new parking areas on the Plant to accommodate its employees.
The Conceptual Plan illustrates the potential redevelopment of each of these parcels with
laboratory uses,resulting in approximately 720,000 square feet of new space in four
separate stmctures.Both DP2 and DP4 could accommodate two,6-story structures
containing 180,000 square feet each.A new 2-to 3-story parking garage would be
constructed between the new buildings on DP2,and the additional parking needs would
be provided by ear-marking a portion of the stalls within the 10-20 parking garage.On
Page 7 of9
October 3,2005
ORDINANCE NO.5242
DP4,sufficient surplus parking exists within the existing 10-18 parking garage that no
new parking would need to be constructed in this location.
Alternately,either DP2 or DP4 could also be redeveloped with new office uses.Given
the greater parking requirement for office space (3.5/1 ,000)when compared to lab space
(111,000),less development is able to be accommodated on the parcels.On DP2,a
single,6-story structure would be developed,containing 120,000 square feet.New
structured parking would be developed behind.On DP4,approximately 300,000 square
feet could be constructed in two,6-story buildings,with all parking still provided within
the existing 10-18 building garage.
DP3
This parcel is located just south of the 10-18 office building,at the comer of 6th and Park
A venues.The Plan envisions the development ofthis parcel with new lab or office uses,
in both cases housed within a single 6-story structure.If developed as lab space,the
building could contain approximately 180,000 square feet,supported by dedicated
parking stalls within a new,multi-user garage constructed on DP2.If developed as office
space,a building of approximately 120,000 square feet could be constructed on site,with
parking either provided in a new garage on DP3 or accommodated by providing
additional parking levels within a DP2 garage.
Alternately,the DP3 parcel could accommodate up to 24,000 square feet of neighborhood
retail space,fronting on Park Avenue and offering amenities to the surrounding \vorkers
and residents.Although no redevelopment of the land on the other side of Park Avenue
is envisioned as part of this Conceptual Plan,redevelopment ofDP3 could also lead to
other improvements along Park Avenue at key intersections.It is envisioned that,if
developed with retail"uses,DP3 would begin to meet the increased demands for amenities
and services that redevelopment along the 6th A venue corridor would require.
Summary
Redevelopment as illustrated within this Conceptual Plan would be consistent with the
City's Urban Center-North vision and long-range planning policies,creating a vibrant,
mixed-use conidor on the north side of6 th Avenue and along Park,with mid-rise
buildings fronting the streets and structured parking behind.If new development took the
fonn of multi-family and laboratory space,the cOlTidor would contain a total 535 new
multi-family units and 900,000 square feet of new lab spac.e at full build-out.This new
mix of uses would be at a scale consistent with the 660,000 square feet of existing office
space already located in the corridor.
Page 8 of9
October 3,2005
ORDINANCE NO.5242
Economic Benefit Analysis Summary
Boeing's Conceptual Redevelopment Plan for Sub-District I-B seeks to both allow for
the near-term redevelopment of Boeing's underutilized assets while advocating for a mix
of uses that significantly improves the City's tax and employment base.Two economic
benefit analyses (Exhibit 4)have been completed to support this submittal,demonstrating
the potential one-time and recurring revenues generated by:
(1)Development illustrated within the Planning Diagram on the ROFO portion of the
Sub-District (beginning in 2007);and
(2)Development illustrated within the Planning Diagram on the Boeing Remainder
(beginning in 2007 for DP 1 and in 2016 for DP 2 -DP 4).
The economic benefits to the City of Renton associated with the redevelopment of the
ROFO portion of the site can be summarized as follows:
..By 2008 (project stabilization),it is estimated that over 1,061 jobs would be
created in the City of Renton alone;of this job total,859 direct jobs would be
located within the development and 202 would be indirect City jobs;
Ii The City is estimated to gain one-time revenues ofnearly $667,000 during
redevelopment of the parcels;
•The City is also forecast to receive an increase in recurring annual tax revenues of
nearly $856,000,beginning in 2008.
The economic benefits to the City of Renton associated with the redevelopment of the
Boeing Remainder portion of the site (DP 1 -4)can be summarized as follows:
•By 2013 (project stabilization),it is estimated that over 2,100 jobs would be
created in the City of Renton alone if this portion were developed with
multifamily and lab uses as illustrated on the Conceptual Plan;of this job total,
1,700 direct jobs would be located within new buildings and 400 \vould be
indirect City jobs;
a Under this same set ofland use assumptions,the City is estimated to gain one-
time revenues of more than $6.2 million during redevelopment of the parcels;
•The City is also forecast to receive an increase in recurring annual tax revenues of
nearly $2.3 million,beginning in 2013.
Page 9 of9
October 3,2005
[1
ORDINANCE NO.5242
Irban Center North District Sub-areas f~.
.stricts Subject to Conceptual Plan Approval
Nola:District boundaries indude dedicated R..()..W
e~~-Economic.Oc:vctOPDldlf:.Ncigbbo.dtoods znd'StraScgjc Phnnlng
'lR}'~:°o:.'i:X"'''"'=«Ex hI'bit _'~<:>-,.;,(~0 Nl.lvQWo·;wo)
ORDINANCE NO.5242
PROPOSED ARTERIAL RIGHTS OF WAY
TO SUPPORT DISTRICT 2
(FULL BUILDOUT)
..,'I./oStA,SJi<.iVa!'~R(.l.;.!».~l ry ;>~
~~PO,~I:$'~""IOi;I.l.~
CttM,A.lO'l"~~,..J U,lf J 1,:)l'r'H.
.I1I!f:lI~l1\il-J
a:;.,..-r.8fwIt.£W.#Cl:Xl
~,~,~
CUll~I'~iZ'tJ~
EXHIBIT
"}
ORDINANCE NO.5242
Renton -Sub District 1B I