HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 4708 Amended by ORD 5450
THE CTTY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RII�iTON ADDING A NEW CHAPTER
ENTITLED "RENTON TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY REGULATIONS"
TO TITLE IV (BUILDING REGIILATIONS) , OF ORDINANCE 4260
ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF
RENTON, WASfiINGTON" TO ENSIIRT THAT RENTON TRANSPORTATION
LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS ARFs ACHIEVED CONCURRENTLY WIZ`S
DEVELOPMENT OR WITHIN A REASONABLE TIME AFTER DEVELOPMENT
OCCUPANCY AND IISE.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF . RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN
AS FOLLOWS :
SECTION I. A new Chapter 39 entitled "Renton
Transportation Concurrency Regulations" is hereby added to Title IV
(Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 4260 entitled '�Code of I�
General Ordinances of the City of Renton, Washington�� and reads as
follows : '
CHAPTER 39
RENTON TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY REGULATIONS
SECTION:
4-39-1: AUTHORITY AND PURPOSE .
4-39-2 : DEFINITIONS
4-39-3 : APPLICABILITY AND EXEMPTIONS
4-39-4 : CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS
4-39-5 : TRANSFER.ABILITY OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY
4-39-6 : EXPIRATION OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY
4-39-7 : RECONSIDERATION OF CONCURRENCY TEST
4-39-8 : APPEAL OF PROJECT APPLICATION DENIAL
4-39-9 : CONCURRENCY INQUIRY
4-39-1: AUTHORITY AND. P,URPOSE:
This chapter is enacted pursuant to the Washington State Growth
Management Act, Chapter 36 .70A, at RCW 36 .70A.070 . It is the purpose
of this chapter to ensure Renton transportation level of service
�
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
standards are achieved concurrently with development, or within a
reasonable time after development occupancy and use.
4-39-2 : DEFINITIONS :
A. CONCURRENCY OR CONCURRENT WITH DEVELOPMENT:
� Transportation improvements or strategies are in place at the time of
building permit issuance, or a financial commitment is in place to
complete the improvements or strategies within six years of building
pennit issuance.
B. DEPARTMENT: The Planning/Building/Public Works Department.
C. DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY PERMIT APPLICATION: For the purposes
of transportation concurrency regulations, any construction, building
. expansion, or change in use which .creates additional demand upon or
need for transportation facilities and which requires a development
permit from the City of Renton.
D. DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: Written permission from the
appropriate City decision-maker authorizing the division of a
parcel of land, the construction, reconstruction, conversion,
structural alteration, relocation or enlargement of any structure,
or any use or extension of the use of the land.
E. FINANCIAL CONIl�IITMENT: Includes revenue designated in the
most currently adopted Transportation Improvement Program for
transportation facilities or strategies through the six year period
with reasonable assurance that such funds will be timely put to such
ends, unanticipated revenue from federal or state grants for which
the City has received notice of approval, and/or revenue that is
2
- -
ORDINANCE NO. 4708
assured by an applicant in a form approved by the City in a voluntary
agreement.
F. FINDING OF CONCURRENCY: A written finding that is part of �
the applicable development permit issued by the City indicating that
a development activity permit application has successfully passed the
Renton transportation concurrency test . The finding of concurrency
is made by the decision-maker with the authority to approve the
development permit.
�
G. LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) : A measure of the quality and
efficiency of facilities and systems. The Renton transportation LOS
is adopted in the Renton Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element .
The transportation LOS standard establishes an index value which
must be met or exceeded in future years . The LOS index value is
determined by the weighted sum of the PM peak travel distances from
the City, averaged in all directions, in 30 minutes for SOV, HOV,
and transit modes . The current index value is 49 . More in-depth
discussion of the City-wide LOS policy may be found in the
Transportation Element .
H. TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY TEST: Technical review of a
development activity permit application by the Department to j
determine if the transportation system has adequate or unused or I'!
uncommitted capacity, or will have adequate capacity, to accommodate
trips generated by the proposed development, without causing the
level of service standards to decline below the adopted standards, at '
the time of development or within six years .
3
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
I : VESTED: The right to develop or continue development in
accordance with the laws, rules, and other regulations in effect at
the time vesting is achieved. The time vesting is achieved is
determined in accordance with brightline vesting rules included in
�State legislation and case law. �
4-39-3 : APPLICABILITY AND EXEMPTIONS:
A. APPLICABILITY: A concurrency test shall be conducted for
all development activity applications, as defined in section 4-39-2,
excluding exemptions.
B. EXEMPTIONS: The following applications are exempt from
the concurrency test: I
1. Applications categorically exempt from SEPA review
under Chapter 4-6 of the Renton Municipal Code.
a. The concurrency test shall not be conducted for
projects that are subject to SEPA review due to their location within
an environmentally sensitive area, but which would otherwise be
exempt from SEPA review.
b. The concurrency test exemption shall not apply
to short plats .
2 . Any project that is a component of a development
which was granted a finding of concurrency that has not expired.
3 . Development vested prior to April 6, 1998 .
4 . Projects granted a finding of concurrency where the
development activity is conducted by a person or entity other than
the original appl�icant, if the project is limited to the uses,
4
ORDINANCE N0. 4708,
intensities, and vehicle trip generation rates for which the
finding of concurrency was originally made.
4-39-4: CONCURRENCY REVIEW PROCESS:
A. TEST REQUIRED: A concurrency test shall be conducted by
the Department. for each non-exempt development activity. The
concurrency test shall determine consistency with the adopted City-
wide Level of Service Index and Concurrency Management System
established in the Transportation Element of the Renton Comprehensive
Plan, according to rules and procedures established by the
Department. The Department shall issue an initial concurrency test
result describing the outcome of the concurrency test.
B. WRITTEN FINDING REQUIRED: Prior to approval of any non-
exempt development activity permit application, a written finding of
concurrency shall be made by the City as part of the development
permit approval . The finding of concurrency shall be made by the
decision-maker with the authority to approve the accompanying
development permits required for a development activity. A written
finding of concurrency shall apply only to the specific land uses,
densities, intensities, and development project described in the
application and development permit.
C. FAILURE OF TEST: If no reconsideration is requested, or
if upon reconsideration a project fails the concurrency test, the
project application shall be denied by the decision-maker with the
authority to approve the accompanying development activity permit
, application.
5
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
4-39-5 : TR.ANSFERABILITY OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY:
A. A written finding of concurrency is not transferable to
other land, but may be transferred to new owners or lessees of the I
original land.
B. Revisions to an approved development that may create
additional impacts on transportation facilities will be required to
undergo an additional concurrency test . A new finding of ,
concurrency is required from the decision-maker with the authority I
to approve the revised project in order to permit the revised
development activity.
C. Revisions to an approved development that reduce the
intensity or density or vehicle trip generation rates of the
project, resulting in less impacts to transportation facilities
than originally approved, will be required to undergo an additional ,
concurrency test in order to properly account for unused capacity..
Unless the revised development requires newly issued development
permit approvals, the previous finding of concurrency remains in .
effect, and a new finding of concurrency is not required, for the
less intense or dense proposal .
4-39-6 : EXPIRATION OF WRITTEN FINDING OF CONCURRENCY:
A finding of concurrency shall expire if the accompanying
development permit expires or is revoked. A finding of concurrency
may be extended according to the same terms and conditions as the
accompanying development permit. If the development permit is
granted an extension, the finding of concurrency shall be extended
6
ORDINANCE N0. 47a8
simultaneousl for the same eriod. If the accom an in develo ment
Y P P Y g P
permit does not expire, the finding of concurrency shall be valid for
a period of three years from the date the written finding was made.
4-39-7 : RECONSIDERATION OF CONCURRENCY TEST: I
A. NOTIFICATION REQUIRED: Prior to a final recommendation or
decision to deny a development activity permit application due to
failure of the concurrency test, the Department shall notify the '�
project applicant in writing of the initial concurrency test results.
B. RECONSIDER.ATION AUTHORIZED: The Department shall' allow an I
applicant of a development activity that has failed an initial
concurrency test to request an administrative reconsideration of the
concurrency test results or prepare a modified project submission.
C. TIMING: Requests for reconsideration shall be made in
writing within ten calendar days of the Department ' s written li
notification. Requests for reconsideration shall be directed to the
Department Administrator, and be filed with the Development Services
Division counter no later than 5 :00 p.m. of the tenth day. I
D. OPTIONS TO ACHIEVE CONCURRENCY: The Department shall II
allow an applicant to submit alternative data, provide a traffic
mitigation plan, or reduce the size of the project in order to
achieve concurrency. I
E. 120 DAY TIME LIMIT SUSPENDED: Upon receipt of a request I
for reconsideration, the one hundred twenty day permit review time
limit established in RMC Section 4-36-7 .G, shall be suspended
temporarily until the decision date to allow an applicant to prepare
7
�I
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
any supplemental information, and to allow Department review of the
request for reconsideration and data submitted.
4-39-8: APPEAL OF PROJECT APPLICATION DENIAL:
A. A project applicant may appeal the denial of a development ,
activity based upon failure of a concurrency test. The appeal shall �'
be based upon one or both of the following grounds :
1. Technical error; or
2 . The applicant submitted alternative data or a traffic
mitigation plan that was rejected by the City.
B. If the development activity requires a T�rpe I, II, or III
permit as defined in RMC Chapter 4-36, the decision to deny a finding
of concurrency may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner for an open
record appeal . The decision of the Hearing Examiner may be appealed ;
to the City Council for a closed record appeal .
C. If the development activity requires a Type V or VI permit
as defined in RMC Chapter 4-36, the decision to deny a finding of
concurrency may be appealed to the City Council for a closed record
appeal, or the Shoreline Hearings Board, as appropriate.
D. If the development activity requires a 'I�pe IV, VII, VIII,
IX or X permit as defined in RMC Chapter 4-36, the decision to deny a
finding of concurrency may be appealed to Superior Court.
4-39-9 : CONCURRENCY INQUIRY:
A. An applicant may . inquire whether or not there is
sufficient capacity available to accommodate a development without
submittin a develo ment a lication.
g P PP
8
ORDINANCE N0. 4708
B. Available capacity cannot be reserved based on a
preliminary inquiry. �
C. A written finding of concurrency will only be issued in
conjunction with a development activity permit application.
SECTION II. This ordinance shall be effective upon its
passage, approval, and thirty days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 2nd day of Narch , 1998 .
Marily J. etersen, City Clerk
. APPROUED. BY -THE MAYOR this 2nd day of March , lggg , '
�
, Jes e Tanner, Mayor
App d as to orm:
Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney
Date of Publication: March 6, 1998
ORD. 704 :2/11/98 :as .
9