The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-04-103CITY OF RENTON PLANNING / BUILDING / PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM Date: January 20, 2005 To: City Clerk's Office From: Holly Graber Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments LUA (file) Number: LUA-04-103, ECF Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Elizabeth Higgins Acceptance Date: August 30; 2004 Applicant: City of Renton, EDNSP Owner: City of Renton Contact: Rebecca Lind PID Number: ERC Decision Date: September 14, 2004 ERC Appeal Date: September 27, 2004 Administrative Approval: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT MANDATED CITY OF RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY i I ~ r I The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by • jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. Celf"l-Mtrl.wt J. ~ D The Land Use Element has expanded Airport Compatible Land Use policies that include the entire Airport Influence Area; annexation policies have been revised to reflect current City policies related to priority for annexing certain types of land and sets the stage for future City consolidation of fire and library districts and water/sanitary sewer providers; non-conforming use and structure policies , have been added; residential policies have been revised to create a stronger hierarchy based on density; Centers policies have been refocused to the Urban Center and the Highlands Subarea, i designated as the Highlands Neighborhood Center; the Center Office/Residential designation has been renamed Commercial/Office/Residential; the Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center designations have been renamed Commercial Corridor; and areas previously referred to as Convenience Commercial have been redesignated as Neighborhood Commercial. A new Community Design Element has been added that addresses quality of life, infill development, and aesthetics in the City. The Transportation Element has been revised to reflect an update of the horizon year to 2002- 2022, new traffic modeling, and an adjustment to the LOS index. The Housing Element has been revised to reflect data obtained from the 2000 census. Policies encouraging bonuses for increased density have been eliminated, which may result in fewer housing units, but new policies have been adopted to increase flexibility in housing types, which may add housing units. The new Human Services Element includes objectives and policies to meet the goal of increasing opportunities for Renton citizens to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs and enhancement of their quality of life. Data received from the 2000 census was used to update population and housing forecasts in the Capital Facilities Element so that levels of service standards for existing facilities can be maintained and future plans can be made to provide service at current or higher levels. The Utility Element policies reflect the need to ensure that as areas annex into the City, development meets City standards. Modifications have been made to the Economic Development Element to reflect changed conditions in the City including those based on the rezone of the Boeing Renton Plant Site. Another new element, Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails, has the goal to "Provide a high quality, comprehensive park, recreation, open space, and trail system to meet the short-and long- term needs of current and future Renton residents." The Environmental Element has been revised to ensure consistency between the Growth Management Act and the Shoreline Management Act, to add policies that reflect the federal Endangered Species Act; to protect endangered species that pass through the City, while 1 continuing to allow growth; provide management of shorelines of the state; incorporate Best Available Science, and allow clustering of residential development for environmental protection. The Comprehensive Plan Amendments require modification of Development Standards found in Renton Municipal Code, Title IV. The following Chapters have been modified: 4-2-010, 020, 060, 070, 080, 110, and 120 4-3-020, 040, 050, and 095 4-4-070, 080, 120, and 130 4-6-060 4-7-150 and 170 4-8-100 and 120 4-9-195, 200, and 250 4-11-010, 040, 070, 120, 190, and 260 The following are Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments: #2003-M-2 (LUA-01-167): King County Public Health Department Facility, NE 4th Street Proposal: Changing the Comprehensive Plan designation from Center Institution to Commercial Corridor to rezone from Light Industrial to Commercial Arterial. #2003-M-7: Residential 4 Zoning, Citywide. Proposal: Review Rural Residential designations to evaluate which properties are appropriate for R-4 zoning and make appropriate map amendments. #2004-M-01 (LUA03-118): Jones Rezone on Maple Valley Highway; 2904 Maple Valley Highway. Proposal: Consider Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Options to Neighborhood Commercial and a rezone from R-10 to CA. #2004-M-02 (LUA-03-120): Sunset Heights Retirement; 141st Ave SE to 146th Ave SE between NE Sunset Blvd and NE 112th PI. Proposal: Request Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Rural to Residential Medium Density with concurrent rezone from RR to R-10. #2004-M-03 (LUA-03-119): AnMarco / Old Stoneway Concrete Plant Site; 1920 Maple Valley Highway. Proposal: Land Use Map Amendment and Rezone from COR to Commercial Corridor designation and Commercial Arterial zoning. #2004-M-04 Revisions to the Employment Area-Valley and Automall; SW Renton Proposal: Expand the Automall to Oakesdale Avenue SW on the west and Williams Avenue S on the east. This expansion will require adjusting the designations for land currently in the Employment Area -Valley to Employment Area -Industrial. #2004-M-05 Revisions to Centers, Institutional, and Residential Designations and Associated Zones, Citywide. Proposal: Commercial Areas -Eliminate the Center Suburban and Center l Neighborhood designations and replace them with a Commercial Corridor designation. The zoning: would be Commercial Arterial. Incorporate the Center Institution designation into the new Commercial Corridor designation. The underlying zoning would be Commercial Corridor. Chang,e: the Convenience Commercial designation and zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Residential Areas -Consolidate the Residential Multi-family Center Suburban, Residential Multi-family Neighborhood Center, and Residential Multi-family Infill into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone. Consolidate the Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood, designations into one, Residential Medium Density. The underlying zoning remains Residential 10 , and Residential 14. #2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard; 600 Block of SW Sunset Boulevard and portions of the 400 and I 700 Blocks, and a portion of the 300 Block of Stevens Avenue SW. Proposal: Redesignate a ; portion of single-family designated and zoned land, Single Family Residential and Residential 8, ; respectively, to the Comprehensive Plan designation Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial; zoning. Location: Citywide Comments: STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING } AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLICATION PUBLIC NOTICE Lily Nguyen, being first duly sworn on oath that she is a Legal Advertising Representative of the King County Journal a daily newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation' and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in the English language _ continuously as a daily newspaper in King County, Washington. The King County Journal has been approved as a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues of the King County Journal (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Public Notice was published on Friday, 9117104 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $68.00 at the rate of $15.50 per inch for the first publication and N/A per inch for eaclrsub~equwt insertion. Lily Nguye Legal Advertising Representative, King County Journal Subscribed and sworn to me this 17th day of September, 2004. ~~ \\\\\\1111/1/111/1 :-.,-,\\\\ W. EAGf.j 11//1/. ~ ~ .......... ~-$> 'l Tom A. Meagher $' ~ "'~\on Ex,,·.··.. ~ Notary Public for the State of Washington, Residing in Red~"'WashiJlg~iV"" ~ --I-• ~ "\ p,tfT ~ -Ad Number: 846975 P.O. Number: -= t cJ ~'\j _ : z § Cost of publishing this notice includes an affidavit surchar~. \ -0 \\J j r: § ~ .,,\. PU'?>\. <:>"/ C!J ~ ~ \J).. rz,tl" ~ ~ -/ A1 ". MAY 2 ••••• ~ ~ ~ . r ri·· ...... ··· S",' ~ ///111 0 F \l'J II' \,\\~ /11111111\1\\\\\\ NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Non-Significance . for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. City of Renton Management Act - Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments LUA04-103, ECF Growth Mandated Map' and Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writ- ing on or before 5:00 PM on September 27, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8- 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Published in the King County Journal September 17, 2004. #846975 · ., Agencies See Attached Parties of Record See Attached (Signature of Sender):~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON J COUNTY OF KING ) SS ) .... , ...... ,""'\\\tt .:--..... ~\,~~ .. ~41. ".", f ~~':J.\SS'Otv~?~ '" ~ .. o~ +-o •• ~ ~ : : CJ ~OT -4,-9 -:"1'. "1'\ ~ ~ i J.. "?r.~ ~ '-: --.~ 00: ~ ~(/), /:J ." ~ A '" (laue .: : I, "Y.,.>. ••• 8, ... ~; I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker "" ~ ;;·':-?.f!:.9~,""·~O ;- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for ~n~'tI~\i~ .... -- purposes mentioned in the instrument. I'II\\\W~''''''''''''' Dated: COck 1, :J.MY <--Jn~~~ NQYPUbliCin andforthate of Washington Notary (Print): _____ .,n,MAR;;,.;m;IL:,.,.:vN~KAM~C~HE=FF'="":,...".,....,.__--------- My appointment expires: MYAPPOINTMENTEXPIRJ:C' ~~ •• - 2004 Comp Plan Amendments LUA04-103, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing . , Dept. of Ecology • Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region· Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers· Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor· Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold· Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. c/o Department of Ecology . 3190 160th Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer Bellevue, WA 98008 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office· Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program 4717 W Marginal Way SW . Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division· Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor P rese rvation· Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application .• Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing Thomas F. Haensly 144'Railroad Avenue, Suite 217 Edmonds, W A 98020 Jason Anderson 3800 SE Sunset Blvd #E204 Renton Wa 98056 Glenda Johnson 1216 Monroe Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 P.M. LaRue 2505 Maple Valley Highway Renton, WA 98058 Duncan Smith 12115138th PI SE Renton, WA 98059 Louis Webster City of Newcastle 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Richard Gumpert 742 1st Street S. Kirkland, WA 98033 David Main 40305 302nd Ave SE Enumclaw, WA 98022 Jess Qunell 12931 NE 126th Place Kirkland, WA 98034 Bob Moran 425 Wells Ave S , Renton, WA 98055 Suzanne Thompson 17050 Northup Way, #8 Bellevue, WA 98008 Alain Bourdoisean 1915 NE 27'h Renton, WA 98056 Chris Anderson 602 Taylor PI. NW Renton, WA 98055 Robert & Deanna Debak 1700 NE 20th St Renton, WA 98056 Troy Humphrey 315 39th Ave SW, Ste. 6 Puyallup, WA 98373 Bob Blayden PO Box 3029 Renton, WA 98056 Ron Hughes Burnstead Construction Co. 1215120th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98005 Kerry Nicholson Legacy Partners 7525 SE 24th St, Ste 180 Mercer Island, WA 98040 James Mahoney 14011 160th Ave SE Renton, WA 98058 Gary & Yvonne Pipkin 1120 N. 38th Street Renton, WA 98056 Tridelt, Inc. 6840 112th Ave SE Newcastle, WA 98056 Saandel DeMasters 1137 Harrington Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 John Hansen 1108 Anacortes Ave NE Renton, WA 98059 John B. Bratton Brian Tucker 2100 NE 124 St. Ste 100 Bellevue, WA 98008 Steve Pacquet 12931 NE 126th Place Kirkland, Wa 98034 Todd Sherman Shermon Development 2100 124th Ave NE #'100 Bellevue, W A 98005 Bob Ehrlichman Bennett Development PO Box 51156 Seattle, WA 98115 Marilyn & Clay Hanson 1555 Union Ave NE. #31 Renton, WA 98059 Fred Wendling 113 Anacortes Ct. NE Renton, WA 98059 James Justus 1205 Grant Ave S, #N202 Renton, WA 98005 Gary L. Bergger 1433 Monterey Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 Tom Tasa 2900 NE 10th Renton, WA 98056 Marcie Maxwell PO Box 2048 Renton, WA 98056 Colin Walker Kristie Savala 3233 NE 12th St, #301 Renton, WA 98056 Carol Peterson 12115138th PI SE Renton, WA 98059 James E. Hurner 659 Blain Ave NE Renton, WA 98056 June Hill 13527 156th Ave Renton, WA 98059 Traci Shallbetter 1501 Fourth Ave, Ste 2600 Seattle, WA 98101 Mike O'Halioran 4420 SE 4th Street Renton, WA 98059 Steve Morris . 15 S. Grady Way, Suite 600 Renton, WA 98055 Betty Mattison 1560 Vashon Ave. NE Renton, WA 98059 Diana Kordus 760 Union NE Renton, WA 98056 Rocky Gerber 2717 NE 23rd Street Renton, WA 98059 Jim Dalpay PO Box 2436 Renton, WA 98059 Melissa Frysztacki 7002 25th Ave NW # A Seattle, WA 98117 Myrne Larsen 1204 N. 33rd St. Renton, WA 98056 Kay Johnson 912 Kirkland Ave. Renton, WA 98056 Mary Leith 3317 N.E. 11 th Street Renton, WA 98056 Jim & Barbara Sather 3112 NE 10th Street Renton, WA 98056 David & Casey Hunter 1425 N. 36th Avenue Renton, WA 98056 David Halinen Halinen Law Offices, P.S. 2115 North 30th, Suite 203 Tacoma, WA 98403 Laura Whitaker Perkins Coie 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800 Seattle, WA 98101-3099 Jim Hanson Hanson Consulting 17446 Mallard Cove Ln. Mt. Vernon, WA 98274 Thomas F. Haensly 144 Railroad Avenue, Suite 217 Edmonds, W A 98020 Sam Pace Seattle-KC Association of Realtors 29839 154th Avenue SE Kent, W A 98042-4557 Sue Larson-Kinzer 1733 NE 20th Street Renton, WA 98056 George Mehrens 316 S. Tobin Street Renton, W A 98055 Garrett Huffman So. K.C. Manager Master Builders Association 335 116th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98004 Dean Radford King County Journal Nora Schultz 2515 4th Ave, Apt. 1607 Seattle, WA 98121 Mike Flynn, President WA Assoc. of REALTORS 504 E. 14th, Suite 200 PO Box 719 Olympia, WA 98507-0719 '~: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: 2004 Comp Plan Amandmenta PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-103, ECF LOCATION: Citywide DESCRIPTION: In accordance with RCW 36.70A-l0B, the City of Renton Intend. to adopt amendments to Ita Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Map Amendments and Zoning Development Standard Text Amendments that Implement the Plan, and Concurrent Rezone •• In addition, the Ctty will adopt private Land USB Map and Concurrent Rezonel baaed on application. submitted by private partie. In December 2003. Renton'. Comprehensive Plan we8 adopted In 1995 Bnd he. been amended Incrementally each year since. The atate of Washington Growth Management Act 0' 1990 CGMA) requIre. I!I comprehensive review of Comprehensive Plana by lurtdlctlona planning under GMA, which Includes the City of Renton. The current amendment proceaa la the flrat thorough review and revlalon 0' the document since Ita adoption. The GMA-mandated review muat be completed by December 1, 2004 (atate deadline). The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City Initiated such review In December 2001. The City deadline for adoption of Amendments Is October 25, 2004. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals 0' the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on September 27, 2004. Appeals must be flied In wrIting together with the required $75.00 eppllcatlon feo with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are govemed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 44-110.B. Addltlonallnfonnatlon regardIng the appeal proceaa may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk'. Office, (425) 43()'6510. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Include the proJect·NUMBER:when calling for proper file Identification. CERTIFICATION I, ------==Oe.::..=(i=e.k..-'----_J....;:.o_r4n:::..=""'--' ___ , hereby certify that I 5 copies of the above document were posted by me in ~\S:::..,._ conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on Sc:.f+. I b t'" ( J..oo'j Signed:122/,l./"J! ~ ATTEST: Subscribed~WOfJ1!:efore me, a Notary Public, in and f~e of . 00 Washington residing~ , on the Or} -n.. day of Vel -=<t'2oy - MARILYN KAMCHEFF MY APPOINTMENT EXPIPP~ ~ ~~ .- f.o~'l/1-07 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (DNS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-103, ECF LOCATION: Citywide DESCRIPTION: In accordance with RCW 36.70A.106, the City of Renton intends to adopt amendments to Its Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Map Amendments and Zoning Development Standard Text Amendments that Implement the Plan, and Concurrent Rezones. In addition, the City will adopt private Land Use Map and Concurrent Rezones based on applications submitted by private parties In December 2003. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted In 1995 and has been amended incrementally each year since. The state of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) requires a comprehensive review of Comprehensive Plans by jurldlctlons planning under GMA, which Includes the City of Renton. The current amendment process Is the first thorough review. and revision of the document since Its adoption. The GMA-mandated review must be completed by Dec:'ember 1, 2004 (state deadline). The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City Initiated such review in December 2001. The City deadline for adoption of Amendments is October 25, 2004. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on September 27, 2004. Appeals must be flied In writing together with the required $75.00 application fee wlt~: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 O.B. Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. THE RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION WILL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS AND ~THER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ~ND ZONING AMENDMENTS ON TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 21 5 AND TUESDAY SEPTEMBER 28 H AT A PUBLIC HEARING TO BE HELD AT 6:00 PM IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, RENTON CITY HALL. [!]f ""","-=-.,,-;:rn FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION ." ., . ~ ••.... \ f' I, ,';' .r " '; .' .. ~;. . ..•. :: ...... :'. " '"" , " . > .. :. . -;' ··t,-",-.. I. ~ -' . '.; .. ,' .. ~. " ,~ " .' , '" .. , ' ,~ Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor September 15, 2004 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 CITY F RENTON PlanningIBuildinglPublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on September 14, 2004: DETERMINATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: . DESCRIPTION: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments LUA04·103, ECF Citywide In accordance with RCW 36.70A.106, the City of Renton intends to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Map Amendments and Zoning Development Standard Text Amendments that implement the Plan, and Concurrent Rezones. In addition, the City will adopt private Land Use Map and . Concurrent Rezones based on applications submitted by private parties in December 2003. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted' in 1995 and has been amended incrementally each year since .. The state of Washington GroWth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) recjuiresa comprehensive review of Comprehensive Plans by juridictions planning under GMA, which includes the City of Renton. The current amendment process is the ,first thorough review and revision of the document since itsadoptioli. . The GMA-mandated review must be completed by December 1, 2004 (state deadline). The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City initiated such review in December 2001. The City deadline for adoption of Amendments is October 25,2004. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM September 27, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 O.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. If you have questions, pl~ase call me at (425) 430-6588 For the Environmental Review Committee, Rebecca Lind Planning Manager cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division WDFW, Stewart Reinbold David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Stephanie Kramer, Office of Archaeology WSDOT, Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office ------}-OS--S-s-o-ut-h-G-ra-d-y-W;-ay-.-R-e-n-to-n,-W;-a-sh-:i-ng-to-n-9-g-0-SS------R E N TON . * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA04-103, ECF APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT NAME: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: In accordance with RCW 36.70A.1 06, the City of Renton intends to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan, Concurrent Zoning Map and Text Amendments, and additional Rezones based on applications submitted by private parties in December 2003. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and has been amended incrementally each year since. The state of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) requires a comprehensive review of Comprehensive Plans by juridictions planning under GMA, which includes the City of Renton. The current amendment process is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The GMA-mandated review must be completed by December 1, 2004 (state deadline). The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City initiated such review in December 2001. The City deadline for adoption of Amendments is October 25, 2004. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: Citywide City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section This Determination of Non-Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM September 27, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 O.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Renton Fire Department SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 SEPTEMBER 14,2004 Environmental Review Committee MEETING NOTICE September 14, 2004 To: Gregg Zimmerman, PlanninglBuildinglPublic Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community Services Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning Tuesday, Meeting Date: Time: 9:00AM Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 Agenda listed below. ADDENDUM TO PREVIOUSL Y ISSUED AGENDA 2004 Come Plan Ame"dme"ts (Higgi"s) LUA04-103, ECF In accordance with RCW 36.70A.106, the City of Renton intends to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan, Concurrent Zoning Map and Text Amendments, and additional Rezones based on applications submitted by private parties in December 2003. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and has been amended incrementally each year since. The State of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) requires a comprehensive review of Comprehensive Plans by jurisdictions planning under GMA, which includes the City of Renton. The current amendment process is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The GMA-mandated review must be completed by December 1,2004 (state deadline). The Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City initiated such review in December 2001. The City deadline for adoption of Amendments is October 25,2004. cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor J. COVington, Chief Administrative Officer A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator ® B. Wolters, EDNSP Director ® J. Gray, Fire Prevention N. Watts, P/BlPW Development Services Director ® F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner S. Engler. Fire Prevention ® J. Medzegian, Council S. Meyer, PIB/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Lind, Economic Development L. Warren, City Attorney ® STAFF REPORT A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE: Project Name: Project Number: Project Manager: City of Renton Department of Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE September 14, 2004 Growth Management Act-Mandated City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendments LUA 04-103 Rebecca Lind, Planning Manager Project Description: As mandated by the State of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA), periodic review of Comprehensive Plans is required by jurisdictions planning under GMA. The City of Renton initiated such review of its 1995 Comprehensive Plan (Plan) in December 2001. Although the 1995 Plan has been amended incrementally each year since adoption, the current amendment process is the first thorough review and revision of the document. The following is a description of proposed amendments to the 1995 Comprehensive Plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VISION The Vision embodied by the Comprehensive Plan has been significantly revised to more closely meet the Business Plan Goals of the City Council. The Comprehensive Plan Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City. Its function within the Comprehensive Plan is to give direction to the City goals, objectives, and policies of the Plan. LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is the most broad of all the Elements. It includes "City-wide" policies, which are applicable across all designations and Residential, Centers, Commercial, and Employment Area designation policies, which are applicable only to representative zones. Citywide pOlicies of the Land Use Element of the Plan include the following subsections: • Airport Compatible Land Use, • Annexations, • Historical and Archaeological Resources, • Non-conforming Uses, • Public Facilities, and • Resource Lands. Airport Compatible Land Use policies were initially adopted in 2003. Those policies, however, were only applicable to. the Urban Center -North area of the City. The current amendments to those policies expand the area impacted by the policies to include the remainder of the Airport Influence Area. In addition, policies related to "aviation overflight" have been added. Annexation policies have been revised to reflect current City policies related to priority for annexing certain types of land. Policy has been added that sets the stage for future City consolidation of fire and library districts and water/sanitary sewer providers. New policy on annexation of non-conforming uses has been added. References to the methods of annexation other than the petition method have been removed due to exclusive use of petitions for annexation. Urban Growth Area (UGA) policies have been separated from those of the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) since the UGA includes incorporated Renton and the PAA does not. The policies have been revised to add clarification and remove certain redundancies. ERe staff reporLdot City of Renton EDNSP Department Envir ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED COJ.~. REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14. 2004 Page 2 0/10 The Historical and Archaeological Resources goal, objectives, and policies have been revised to reflect the results of an inventory of historic structures in the downtown. Generally, more realistic policies have been adopted based on feasibility of preserving resources. Although the City has had development standards regulating Non-Conforming Uses, there have not been corresponding policies in the Comprehensive Plan. That has been corrected with the formulation of non-conforming use and structure policies. The only significant change to the Public Facilities section is the incorporation of policies relating to medical facilities. Resource Lands policies have been revised to shift emphasis from large-scale agricultural activities, which no longer take place within the Renton UGA, to policies for small-scale commercial/non-commercial horticultural activities. The Residential policies have been revised to create a stronger hierarchy based on density. The "Low Density Residential" designation includes Resource Conservation, Residential 1 and new Residential 4 zoning. Low Density Residential 'designations are generally located on the fringe of the City and in environmentally critical environments, "Single Family Residential" (Residential 8 zoning comprises the largest residential designation and remains largely Jhe same. The new "Medium Density Residential" designation replaces two designations, Residential Options 'and Residential Planned Neighborhood. Medium Density Residential includes the Residential 10 and 14 zones. Several multi-family designations (Multi-Family Suburban Center, Multi-Family Neighborhood, and Multi~Familylnfill) have been consolidated into a single designation, "Multi-Family Residential," with no change in standards or residential capacity. Major revisions occurred within the Centers designation. Recognizing that several of the designated Centers would not evolve as originally envisioned, the Centers policies have been refocused to the Urban Center and the Highlands Subarea, designated as the Highlands Neighborhood Center. Renton's Urban Center consists of the Urban Center - North and Urban Center -Downtown. Policies previously included in a separate Downtown Element have been revised and incorporated into the Urban Center -Downtown section of the Land Use Element. The Center Office/Residential designation does not have policy changes, but has been renamed "Commercial/Office/Residential," more accurately reflecting the mixed-use nature of future development in these areas. The Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center designations have been reformed to more realistically reflect their linear configuration and named "Commercial Corridor." Properties previously designated Neighborhood Center have density increased from 15 du/net acre to 20 du/net acre. Other differences in development standards are retained in thezonin'g. Each Commercial Corridor includes a node of more intense activity, identified as the "Corridor District." Special' policies and developed standards for setback, landscaping, height, and public areas for each district relate to the unique situation at that location (auto sales, high pedestrian activity, high traffic volume). The former Employment Area -Institutional policies have been merged with the new Commercial Corridor policies due to their similar business nature. Areas previously referred to as Convenience Commercial have been redesignated as "Neighborhood Commercial." These smaller, local business areas are not envisioned to expand significantly. A wider range of uses is added to this deSignation for retail and on-site services, however, the overall job capacity is not changed as the development standards limiting building size are not changed. The Employment Area -Valley and Employment Area -Industrial designations have remained largely the same, with only minor revisions to update the policies. Insignificant remapping of Employment Area uses occurred in the vicinity of Interstate 405 on the west side of Renton as a response to expansion of the Commercial Corridor Automall District.' Redesignation of Employment Area -Industrial occurs on NE 3rd/4th on King County property as part of the change eliminating the Employment Area Institution policies. Existing Industrial zoning is retained and there is 'no change in capacity. Changes to the land use element do not change the overall land capacity of the city or the ability to achieve growth targets. Renton has a growth target of 6,198 units and 27,597 jobs. The Land Use Element, as amended, has capacity for 11,261 units and 32,740 jobs. ERe staff report. dot Ciiy of Renton EDNSP Department Envil ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GJUA-MANDATED COb •• REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 Page3ojlO COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The new Community Design Element is derived from policies formerly included in the Land Use Element where they were arranged by land use type. Due to general difficulty in implementing the policies, they have been consolidated into a single element. Both new objectives and policies have been included with existing ones in this element. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Transportation Element objectives and polices have been revised, and a new goal and several policies were added to primarily reflect the following: • Horizon year updated from 1990-2010 to 2002-2022, • New traffic modeling, • LOS index adjusted, • Project lists and associated financial plan updated, • Text and figures amended to r,eflect new modeling and horizon years, and • Redrafting of existing policies to clarify and remove redundancies. -. , , The new goal reflects the intent to work cooperatively with other jurisdictions and agencies for effective transportation planning. The LOS travel index is changed from a travel time of 46 miles in a 30-minute period to 42 miles. This change represents an overall reduction in service over the 20-year planning period. HOUSING ELEMENT Residential policies in the Land Use Element direct where housing is located: the type of housing allowed in given jurisdictions (Le. single family), and the density at which it occurs (number of units per acre). The Housing Element refines densities, provides more direction for housing types (Le., accessory dwelling units), and provides strategies for affordability in housing. The Comprehensive Plan Housing Element policies have been revised to reflect data obtained from the 2000 census. Policies encouraging bonuses for increased density have been eliminated, which may result in fewer housing units. On the other hand, new policies have been adopted to increase flexibility in housing types, such as cottage housing, which may add housing units. HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT The City of Renton has demonstrated its commitment to community with the addition of a new Element to the Comprehensive Plan, the Human Services Element. A goal of creating "A community in which all members have the opportunity to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs, for the enhancement of their quality of life" is the foundation of a new body of objectives and policies. CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT The Capital Facilities Element includes policies that establish the Citywide level of service, how improvements will be financed,and links improvements with anticipated growth. Again, the data received from the 2000 census was used to update population and housing forecasts. Several Capital Facilities policies have been modified: • Level of service standards for existing facilities in areas the City has control over should be maintained at the current or higher level, ' • No deterioration of existing levels of service that the City has control over should occur, and ' • The levying of impact fees, such as school district fees, should be evaluated. The Parks level of service is reduced from 22.52 to 21.63-acres/1000 population representing an overall decrease in t,he number of parks acres available per capita. UTILITIES ELEMENT ERe staff report.dot City of Renton EDNSP Department Envil ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED COlt •• REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14. 2004 Page 4 0[10 Several revisions to Utility Element policies reflect the need to ensure that as areas annex into the City, development must meet City standards. Revisions are also based on changes to state legislation regarding annexation procedures and the requirement to meet Department of Ecology water quality standards. Solid Waste policies have been modified to reflect the anticipated closing of the Cedar Hills landfill, concern about potential privatization of the transfer system, and the diversion rate increase due to recycling that is offset by an overall increase in quantity. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT Minor modifications have been made to the Economic Development Element to reflect changed conditions in the City since the goals, objectives, and policies were initially adopted. Industrial economic development policies have been revised, based on the rezone from industrial of the Boeing Renton Plant Site in 2003. Greater emphasis has been placed on encouraging the opportunity for industrial uses to be in proximity to retail and office in the Employment Area -Valley. Economic development policies formerly in the Downtown Element, which has been eliminated, have been included in the Economic Development Element. PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS ELEMENT . ,\ I I,; Another 'new element, Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails, has been added to the Renton Comprehensive" Plan~Objectives relating to this area of planning have previously been included in the Land Use Element. Now they are combined with additional objectives and both existing and new policies in a stand-alone element. Objectives and policies are intended to further the goal to "Provide a high quality, comprehensive park, recreation, open space, and trail system to meet the short-and long-term needs of current and future 'Renton residents." ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT The Environmental Element has been revised to ensure consistency between the Growth Management Act (GMA) and the Shoreline Management Act. Policies have been incorporated that address planning with the Endangered Species Act. New Element goals include: • Protect endangered species that pass through the City, while continuing to allow growth. J New policies include: • Incorporation of the Endangered Species Act, and • "Allow clustering of residential development for environmental protection. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS The C~mprehensive Plan Amendments require modification of Development Standards found in Renton Municipal Code, Title IV. The following Chapters have been modified: . 4-2-010, 020, 060, 070, 080, 110, and 120 Changes to uses and development standards. 4-3-020, 040, 050, and 095 4-4-070,080, 120, and 130 4-6-060 4-7-150 and 170 4-8-100 and 120 4-9-195, 200, and 250 4-11-010,040,070,120,190, and 260 These amendments neither increase nor reduce significant land use capacity in the Plan. Amendments are proposed to the development standards for lot size for parcels less than 1-acre in the R-8 zone and for the allowance counting private drives and easements in lot area in all zones. These changes may reduce the number of infililots created, but do not change the maximum density allowed. ERe staff report.dot City of Renton EDNSP Department En vir ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED CO, ••• llEHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTS The following are Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments: #2003-M-2 (LUA-01-167): King County Public Health Department NE 4th Street Facility Applicant: City of Renton Property Owner: King County Page 5 0[10 Proposal: Changing the Comprehensive Plan designation from Center Institution to Commercial Corridor to rezone from Light Industrial to Commercial Arterial. #2003-M-7: Residential 4 Zoning (Citywide) Applicant: City of Renton Property: Citywide Proposal: Review zoning in the Residential Rural Land Use deSignation (proposed Residential Low Density). Existing R-1, R-5 zoning will be evaluated to determine if R-4 zoning is appropriate within this designation. Two groups of parcels in the Single-Family designation are cpnsidered to determine if the propertie~ should be redesignated in th~ proposed Residential Low Density designation. Group #1 includes the .. .... unincorporated area on SR 900 adjacent to 142nd Street and includes King County PID #s 0323059078, 0323059119, 0323059054, 0323059155 & 0323059161. Group #2 includes: multiple properties in the unincorporated area between SE 95th Way on the north and the City of Renton boundaries on the south, mostly west of Union Avenue NE except for the area north of NE 2ih and east of Union Avenue NE, also south of SE 95th Way. The area is generally south of May Creek and north of Honey Creek. #2004-M-01 (LUA03-118): Jones Rezone on Maple Valley Highway Applicant: Troy Jones Property: 2904 Maple Valley Highway Proposal: Consider Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Options to Neighborhood Commercial and a rezone from R-10 to CA. #2004-M-02 (LUA-03-120): Sunset Heights Retirement Applicant: Hendrickson Family Property: 141 s1 Ave SE to 1461h Ave SE between NE Sunset Blvd and NE 1121hpi Proposal: Request Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Rural to Residential Medium Density with concurrent rezone from RR to R-10. #2004-M-03 (LUA-03-119): AnMarco I Old Stoneway Concrete Plant Site Applicant: AnMarco Property: .1920 Maple Valley Highway Proposal: Land Use Map Amendment and Rezone from COR to Commercial Corridor designation and Commercial Arterial zoning. #2004-M-04 Revisions to the Employment Area-Valley and Automall Applicant: City of Renton Property: Southwest Renton area Proposal: Expand the Automall to Oakesdale Avenue SW on the west and Williams Avenue S on the east. #2004-M-05 Revisions to Centers, Institutional, and Residential Designations and Associated Zones Applicant: City of Renton Property: Citywide Proposal: Commercial Areas -Eliminate the Center Suburban and Center Neighborhood designations and replace them with a Commercial Corridor designation. The zoning would be Commerciai Arterial. Incorporate the Center Institution designation into the new Commercial Corridor designation. The underlying zoning would be Commercial Corridor~ Change the Convenience Commercial designation and zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Residential Areas -Consolidate the Residential Multi-family Center Suburban, Residential Multi-family Neighborhood Center, and Residential Multi-family Infill into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone. Consolidate the Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood designations into one, Residential Medium Density. The underlying zoning remains Residential 10 and Residential 14. ERC staff report.dot City of Renton EDNSP Department CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED COj,u REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 #2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard Applicant: City of Renton Envif ~ntal Review Committee Staff Report LUA04-103, ECF Page 60/10 Property: 600 Block of SW Sunset Boulevard and portions of the 400 and 700 Blocks, and a portion of the 300 Block of Stevens Avenue SW Proposal: RedeSignate a portion of single-family designated and zoned land, Single Family Residential and Residential 8, respectively, to the Comprehensive Plan deSignation Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning. Project Location: citywide Exist. Bldg. Area gsf: N/A Site Area: N/A ERe staff report. dot City of Renton EDNSP Department En vii ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED C01.u"REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 Page 70/iO B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: x DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGA T/ON MEASURES DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGA TED. Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. This is a "non-projecf' action and, as such, no mitigation is required. Each project subsequently proposed will be required to provide appropriate mitigation measures D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. Has the applicant adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development? 1. Earth/Geology Impacts: Policy and development standard amendments do not alter the existing adopted regulations pertaining to earth sciences. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 2. Air Impacts: Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 3. Surface Water/Ground Water Impacts: Policy and development standard amendments do not alter the existing adopted regulations pertaining to surface water/ground water. Mitigation Measures: None required ERG staff report.dot City of Renton EDNSP Department CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED COJ'u"REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14. 2004 Nexus: N/A 4. Storm wa ter Envi. ental Review Committee Staff Report LUA04-103, EeF Page 80flO Impacts: There are no standards proposed that effect the delivery of stormwater services to the City and PAA. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 5. Vegetation Impacts: The proposed landscape standards will overall result in a higher standard of vegetation maintenance and management than exists with the existing standards. Landscape plans will be required for single-family plats where no' are required now. New standards provide for identification of trees to. be removed, preservation of significant stands, and replanting. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 6. Transportation Impacts: The reduction of level of service for transportation reflects an increase in congestion and reduction in access of 4-miles/30-minutes over the 21-year planning period. Other amended transportation policies strengthen the transportation network and increase accessibility through the City. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 7. Fire Protection Impacts: No level of service changes are identified. There are no changes proposed in standards that would alter delivery of fire protection services. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 8. Parks and Recreation Impacts: Adoption of the Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails level of service standards results in a reduction of service from 22.52 acres/1000 to 21.63 acres/1000. This reduction of service is offset by inclusion of policies prioritizing development of new parkland in rapidly developing areas, and establishing new policies to address priorities for the type of parkland to be added to the Parks system. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A 9. Land Use Impacts: The changes in the land use element text and land use element map do not substantially reduce existing land use capacity. The existing Buildable Lands Methodology utilizes "factors" for performance in each zone. ERC staff report. dot City of Renton EDNSP Department En vir ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED C01,£, REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14. 2004 Page 90/10 The changes proposed in this Comprehensive Plan will reduce capacity for single-family detached units somewhat for infill parcels and may over a 2-3 year period somewhat reduce the R-8 zone "factor" calculated as the average yield in the zone. The current ''factor'' is 6.7-dwelling units per acres, while the maximum density in the zone is 8-dwelling units per acre. Even with a reduction in the single-family capacity, the City has approximately 5,000 units of excess capacity. Multi-family capacity is 7,000 units based on the current Buildable Lands analysis. Mitigation Measures: None required Nexus: N/A ERe staff report.dot City of Renton EDNSP Department Envii 'ental Review Committee Staff Report CITY OF RENTON GMA-MANDATED CO, •• _ REHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS LUA04-103, ECF REPORT AND DECISION OF SEPTEMBER 14, 2004 Page 100/10 E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. 1--Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. __ Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM September 27,2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton,. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-430-6510. ERG staff report.dot o o 00 o o o \0 0'1 Troy Jones Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Vicinity Map o 400 800 Study Area I j I 1 : 4800 z :::1 0-. 011-1---c-] I Sunset Heights Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Vicinity Map E)i<i Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning + AID + Alex Pietsch. Administrator ~ G. Del Rosario 21 July 2004 Study Area - --City Limits - . - . -Urban Growth Boundary o 400 800 1 : 4800 '\ \ \ , CDR '-----_ .. _--- RC(P) ZONING PIBIPW TECHNICAL SERVICES llI04IOl RC ANMARCO Exhibit 13 RM-I R··· --.. -__ 1 _------'--i--------T-\ .. J ... 'b--c!9O "yo 1:4800 . \ i , ........ __ ... __ .•. : .......... _ .... . I~A iH'1 : ; 1 , 1M Ii 11M i 1M ZONING PIBIPW Tl!CBNlCAL SBllVICBS WOof/OJ C 1M! i CA - - - -Renton dity UmIt/1 SW SUNSET BLVD. t ~-: ~ -.-,-~ \:> .-----~ s~~~ I ---'--L~ C~ , ;-~---.-. '-".'--'-"'--""" T~r"-"" ~. :f .. ···· ... ········-r-····j! :-.::..::::=:--=.t-·-~!..i--- ; · .. ···11 .. ~O·4fO 1-'800 C EXHIBIT A SWII 16th Automall I.r. Automall Corridor Commercial I2ZZI Automall Corridor . Commercial District o 800 1600 Kille!!!!:: 0::::: cc:nhcc~ 1 : 9600 <lJ R-IO ~II R-8 ~ NE 2nd St ILCP) NE 4th Street Corridor ED/N/SP Alex Pietsch, Administrator G. Del Rosario 14 July 2004 ~ ~ RMH Iii NE 4th Street Corridor Commercial NE 4th Street Corridor Commercial District o 800 1600 :c"t acoin ,:: :HcHcCH:C~ 1 : 9600 n ,-.- 1 Sunset Corridor ~ I?Z.Zl Sunset Corridor Commercial Sunset Corridor Commercial District Rt-8 E=J t-~8 o 600 1200 rB e't JaBe on:c1 cene co ICcg~c ~c 1 : 7200 CITY OF RENTON Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning P/BIPW Technical Services G. Del Rosario Proposed 2005 (draft) o 4000 1 : 48000 8000 1 RESIDENTIAL Em Low DcnsilY Residcnlial o Residcnlial Single Family o Rcsidemial Medium Density o ResitJcmial Muhi.Farnily ~ R4 max. Overlay Dislricl CENTER DESIGNATIONS l!!!!I Center Downtown D Center Village _ Urban CCnlcr-Nnnh _ Commercial Office Residcnlial EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS o Empluyment Area -Industrial D Employment Area • Valley MISCELLANEOUS DESIGNATIONS o Commercial Neighhorhuod o COlTidurCommercial City Limits Urbnn Growth Boundary -I City of Relhvl1 Department of Planning / Building / Public ~ .) ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-103, ECF APPLICANT: Cit of Renton PROJECT MANA PROJECT TITLE: 2004 Com Plan Amendments PLAN REVIEW: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA ross: LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77306 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by. jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. (£) Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Ren,,,,n Deparlment of Planning / Building / Public ~'-..• s EN V I RON MEN TAL. & DE VEL 0 PM E NT A P P L I REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'P2(" ~ APPLICATION NO: LUA04-103, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 27,2004 APPLICANT: Cit of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth Hi ins Plan Amendments PLAN REVIEW: SITE AREA: BUILDINGAREA ross: LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77306 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS kJGVJ, ntion to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or er/y assess this proposal. Date City of Reft.",n Department of Planning / Building / Public Vk. "S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ?\enf2e.vi~ COMMENTS DUE: SEPTEMBER 13, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-103, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 27,2004 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Elizabeth HJGruJ1{ OF RENTON PROJECT TITLE: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments PLAN REVIEW: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): ,AUG 3 j 2004 LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77306 BI '" DING DI\lISIO~1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 1 ! =-++0:11 {"'-+-"y~~-- City of Ret .. ",n Department of Planning / Building / Public \1\-... _ .,5 ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~...<~/J~~~~ t,"fQI" COMMENTS DUE: SEP.Jt;IYI6.E 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-103, ECF APPLICANT: Ci of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: PROJECT TITLE: 2004 Com Plan Amendments PLAN REVIEW: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA ross: LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77306 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water LigM/G/are Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/CuI/ural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. :;::;:= POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS -..J..J, ... ~CI!i£i6~tii[*j~. la,~-~/$!lhiSM ... ~gS'S'ie~ ~ F~ IA./W C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS r attention to those areas in which we have expertise and hav ide tified areas of probable impact or properly assess this proposal. Si Date City of Rer..oJn Deparlment of Planning / Building / Public \tV",,'(S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'h:",,-.(... COMMENTS DUE: SEP ~E"M J~rJ~3~db4\7 IE ~ I .•. APPLICATION NO: LUA04-103, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: AUC ~;sli\ 7,2004 APPLICANT: City of Renton PROJECT MANAGER: Eli kbJJ. Hi9~U" 21 2004 ~.J PROJECT TITLE: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments PLAN REVIEW: SITE AREA: BUILDING AREA (gross): CITY OF RENTON FI R F n J: pAJ.:rr ~.'I: ~JT . LOCATION: Citywide I WORK ORDER NO: 77306 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periodic review of Comprehensive Plans by jurisdictions planning under GMA. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and, although periodically revised, this is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. The Comprehensive Plan is currently proposed for revision in ways summarized as follows: The Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City by more closely reflecting the City Council Business Plan Goals. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS AJo S/~c/ ric. ~l-"h~ue6' with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date I • NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON·SIGNIFICANCE {DNS} DATE: August 20, 2004 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA-<l4-103, ECF APPLICATION NAME: 2004 Comp Plan Amendments PROJECT LOCATION: Citywide PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Growth Management Act Mandatod City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendments The Growth Managemant Act of 1990 (GMA) mandates periOdic review of Cornpr9hensive Plans by lur1sdlcllons planning under GMA. Renlot1', Comprehenslv. Plan was adopted In 1999 and, although periodically revised, this Is the flrst thorough review and revision of tho document since Its adopUon. ' The Comprehensive Plan Is ClJrreoUy proposed for revision In ways summarized as follows: The Vision .. roles as an expansloo oltha City', V1aio"ilnd Mission Statements and gives bm 10 the Council's vision of th, future CIt)' by mora closely refIec::tIng!he City Council Bl,ISlneas Plan Goals. The LIInd U •• Elemltnt has expanded Airport Compatible land Us, pollclea thai Include !he entlre Airport Influance Araa; annaKBtion policies have been re'llsed to reneel current City pollda related to pr\orIty for annOJdng certain types efland and .ets the .tage for future City conSOlidation of fire and library dlstrlcb and watertsanllary sewer provide,..; non.conformlng use and structure pOliCle. haV(t been added; residential pollcills have been fevlse(j to create II stronger hierarchy based on density; Centers poliCIes have betn refocused to the Urban Centllr and the Highlands Subarea, designated as the HIghlands Neighborhood Center; the Center OfficalResldentiai deslQflation has been renamed Commerclal/OfficefRe:sldenllal; the Suburban Canter and Neighborhood Center dlllignatlons ha~ been renamed Commercial CorrIdOf'; and areas previously relerred 10 as Convenience Commercial have been red~ated as Nmghborhood Commercial. A new Community Oe.lgn Element ha3 been added thai addresses quality of Ilia, lnflll developmenl, and aesthelles In the City. The Transportation Element has been revised 10 rafieel an update of the horizon year to 2002·2022, new IrBmc modeling, and on adjuslment to the LOS Index. The Housing Element has been revised to reflect data obtained from ttle 2000 census. Policias encouraging bonuses for Increased density have been eliminated. which may result In fewer housing units. but new policies have been adopted to Increase flexibiDty In hOYsing types, which may add housing units. The new Human S.,....lc •• Element [ncludes objecUves anq policies to meet the goal of Increasing opportunities /of Renton clUzeos to I'l1ft6t their basic physical, economic, and social need. and enhancement of their quality ollife. Data reoelvecllrom the 2000 census was used to update population and hOYSlng forecasts in the capital F.clllU .. Element so ttlallevels of service standards for existing faclllUes can be maintained and future ptans can be made 10 provlde eervlce at current or higher level8. The Utility Element policies reftect the need to ensure that 8S areas annex Into the City, development meets City standards. Modincatlons have been made to ttl. Economic D.velopment Element to renect changed conditions In ttle ClIy Including thole based on the rezone of the Boeing Renton Plant Slle. Another new element. Par"tl:l, Recr.allon, Open Space, and Trails, has the goal to ·PrOvlde a high Quality, comprehensive park. reaeatlon, open space, and trallsystem to meet the Short· and Iono-tarm needs of currenl and luwre Renton resldenls." The Environmental Element has been revised 10 ensure consistency belY<8en Ihe Growth Management Act and tho Shoreline Management Act, to add policies that relteCl thel'ederal Endangered Spades Act; 10 protect endangered species that pass through !he City. willie conUnulng to aUow growth; provide management of shorelines of the stale: Incorporate Best Available ScIence. and allow clustering ot residential de"'elopmenl for envlronmenbl protection. -------------- The' Comprehensive Plan Amendments requlra modification of Development Standards found In Renton Municipal Code, Title IV. The following Chapters have been modified: 4·2-010,020,060, 070, 080, 110. and 120 4-J.02O, 040. osa, and 095 44070, 080. 120, and 130 4-6-000 4-7-1~and 170 4·a·l00and 120 4·9-195,200, and 250 4·11-010.040, 070, 120, 190, and 260 , The following are Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments: '2003-M-2 (lUA-01-167): King county Public Health Department Facility, NE ~th Street Proposal: Changing the Comprehensive Plan deslgnallon from Center Institution to Commercial Corridor to rezone from Light Industrial to Commercial Arterial. '2~03-M.7: Residential 4 Zoning, Citywide. Proposal; RevIew Rural Resldenllal designations to evaluate which properties Bre appropriate for R-4 zoning and make appropriate map amendments. #2004-M-01 (lUA03-118): Jones Rezone on Maple Valley Highway; 2904 Maple Valley Highway. Proposal: Consider Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Options to Neighborhood Commercfal and a rezone from R-1 0 to CA. .1 #2004.M-02 (LUA.03.170): Sunset HeIghts Retirement: 141'1 Ave SE to 1461h Ave SE between NE Sunset Blvd and NE 112th PI. ,. p Proposal: Request Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Rural to Residential Medium DensIty with concurrent rezone from RR toR-10. #200~~3 (LUA-03-119): AnMarcol Old Stanaway Concrete Plant Site; 1970 Maple Valley Highway. Proposal: Land Use Map Amendment and Rezone from COR to Commercial Corridor designation and Commercfal Arterial zonIng. #2004·M-04 Revision. to the Employmont Area-Valley and Automal1; SW Renton Proposal: Expand the Automall to Oakesdale Avenue SWan the west and Wnllams Avenue S on the east. This expansion will require adjusting the designations for land currentty In the Employment Area -Valley to Employment Area -Industrial. #2004-M-05 RevisIons to Centers, Institutional, and Residential Designations and Assoelated Zones, CItywide Proposal: Commercial Areas -ElimInate the Center Suburban and Center Neighborhood designations and replace them wllh a Commercial Conidor deslgnaUon. The zoning would be Commercial Arterial. Incorporate the Center InstlbJl!on designation Into the new Commercfal Corridor designation. The underiying zoning would be Commerclal Corridor. Change the Convenience Commercial deslgnatJon and zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Residential Area •• Consolidate the Residential MulU·famlly Center Suburban, Residential Mu\u·family Neighborhood Cenler. and Residential Multi-famJly fnfllllnlo a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone. Consolidate tha Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood designations Into one, Residential Medium Density. The underlying zonIng remains Residential 10 and Residential 14. #2004-M"()6 SW Sunset Boutevard; 600 Block of SW Sun.at Boulevard and portions of the 400 and 700 Blocks, and a portion of the 300 Block of Stevens Avenue SW. Proposal: Redesignate a portion of single-family designated and zoned land, Single Family Residential and Resldentlal8, respectivety, to the Comprehensi",e Plan destgnation Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning. Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Elizabeth HIggins, Senior Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on September 13, 2004. If you have .~ questions about this proposal, or wish to be made B party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. AnYone who submits written comments will automaUcally become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (ONS): As Ihe Leed Agency, Ihe CIIy of Renlon has detennlned that significant environmental impacts are unlikely 10 result from the proposed project. Therefore, as CONTACT PERSON: Elizabeth Higgins Tel: (425) 430·6576 permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110. the City of Renton Is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely 10 be Issued. Commenl periods for Ihe project and Ihe proposed DNS arelnlegreled Inlo a single commenl period. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance (DNS). A 14- day appeal period will fonow the issuance of the DNS. '. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: August 26, 2004 August 30, 2004 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Rebecca Lind Tel: (425) 430-6568 Eml: rllnd@cl.renton,wa.us PennltslRevmw ~equested: Location where appllcatlon may be reviewed: NOA.doc EnvIronmental (SEPA) RevIew PlannlnglBulldlngiPubnc Warns Division, Development Services Department, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further tnfonnation on these proposals, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton. WA 98055. Fila No.lName: LUA04-103. ECF NAME: __________________________________________ ___ ADDRESS: ________________________________________ ___ TELEPHONE NO.: ______________ ___ NCA.doci "' ............ , ............ ,\\\, CERTIFICATION ,~~:~':-~~ .. ~4t::'I" ,'j ,~\ •• ,: ... ,SSIOA:· •• '"'A_'~ <, "". • ~",.. 'If ..1:0 •• ~ " t;' .: ;:<t'-''-1:.'. \~ I. :: ;.J> NorA~ ~ ... "'(\ ~ ". '7).. :$I. "1\ ~ '" J t ~ ~ ~ ~;.-~j Ii 1tJ~l.. or~~ ,hereby certify that S copies of the \ ~\ SlIG .... #:Jove document were posted by me in I S conspicuous places on or nearby " ~ "6',.? .' ~... II j 30 d.o u "., 0 ····.~:9.1 .. ··· ~o ;1:he descnbed property on trve vs:..r l 04 . ··,t WASH\~Q) ......... ... "\, """', ............ ... Signed: ~.L...L.::>oL~~_-'-----a..><::.-L-L ATTEST: SUbscribe~rq1>efOre me, a Not~ic, in and for Washington reSidin~,?r) , on the ~ day of -?oO::Lf1J-L...l---"'-..:!~"'--- L ,·tOlf-l 03 City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT DEVELOPMENT PLANNING , CITY OF RENTON AUG 26,2004 MASTER APPLICATIONiECElvED PROPERTY OWNER{S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, NEIGHBORHOODS, ~ PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME·GROWTH 1"lANAGEMENIr ·~1ANDATED CITY OF ND ~ 1 KI-II t:.Ul \" r LMI1IU I1U Ul:,r Ml'd 1'11;.111 RENTON CO~IPREHENS I VE PLAN AMENDMENTS ADDRESS: 1055 SOUTH GRADY lJAY PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: CITYWIDE RENTON CITY: RENTON, vJASHI NGTON ZIP: 98055 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425-430-6588 (R .LIND) KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): APPLICANT (if other than owner) NIA , NAME: EXISTING LAND USE(S): SEE ATTACHMENT COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S): SEE ATTACHMENT ADDRESS: EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: SEE ATTACHMENT CITY: ZIP: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): SEE ATT ACH~lENT TELEPHONE NUMBER EXISTING ZONING: SEE ATTACHMENT CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SEE ATTACHMENT NAME: REBECCA LIND, PLANNING MANAGER SITE AREA (in square feet): NI A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED COMPANY (if applicable): EDNSP FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING CITY OF RENTON THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): NI A ADDRESS: SAME AS ABOVE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): NI A CITY: ZIP: - NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N/A TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: 425-430-6588 NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): rlind@ci.renton.wa.us NIA Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Forms\P\anning\masterapp,doc08/29/03 ACT P~JECTINFORMATrl~O~N_~(C~O~n~ti~ .. ~~e~d~I) ______________ ~ . NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO 'REMAIN (if applicable): NI A SQUARE FOOtAGE'OF,PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NI A NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS flf applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A PROJECT VALUE: N/A IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE o AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO o FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. fl. o GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. o HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. o SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. ft. o WETLANDS sq. ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE QUARTER OF SECTION , TOWNSHIP , RANGE ,INTHECITY OF RENTON KING COUNTY WASHINGTON LEGAL DESTIITPTIONS FOR CONCURRENT REZONES ~HLL. BE , , . PQJ;pnOJ;n POUIO Tn rTTV rnm,lrTI I\rTT'''',1 TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. 3. 2. 4. Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) , declare that 1 am (please check one) _ the current owner of the property involved in this application or ___ the authorized representative tt) act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. ~u;",G b~~ (Signature of Owner/Representative) - I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ---""..-,--:--_-:--:---:-_--:-::---:-:- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislherlthelr free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument 10 .. 1_ _ , ,,-"" _ , '. _ J Notary Public In and for the State of Washington ~1--";_r'x.._ ...... ~_U_~---f,~ • (Signature of Owner/Representative) Notary (Print), ___________ _ My appointment expires:, ________ _ Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Planning\masterapp,doc08I29/03 '; O~V~LOP , err." N~/Ifr p~ F 1i~"lib~NJNG AUG 26.200+ GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT MANDATED CITY OF RENTO/IECEIV~D COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TEXT AND MAP AMENDMENTS, &;j ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS, AND ADDITIONAL REZONES NARRATIVE As mandated by the State of Washington Growth Management Act of 1990 (GMA), periodic review of Comprehensive Plans is required by jurisdictions planning under GMA. The City of Renton initiation such review in December 2001. Renton's Comprehensive Plan was adopted in 1995 and has been amended incrementally each year since adoption. The current amendment process, however, is the first thorough review and revision of the document since its adoption. 'The following is a summary of proposed amendments to the 1995 Comprehensive Plan. In accordance with RCW 36.70A.I06, the City of Renton announces its intent to adopt amendments to its Comprehensive Plan, Concurrent Zoning Map and Text Amendments, and additional Rezones'based on applications submitted by private parties in December 2003. An electronic copy of the proposed Amendments and Regulations is available upon request to the Economic Development, Neighborhoods, and Strategic Planning Department of the City of Renton. The following summarizes the Comprehensive Plan, Concurrent Zoning Map, and Text Amendments: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN VISION The Vision embodied by the Comprehensive Plan has been significantly revised to more closely meet the Business Plan Goals of the City Council. The Comprehensive Plan Vision serves as an expansion of the City's Vision and Mission Statements and gives form to the Council's vision of the future City. Its function within the Comprehensive Plan is to give direction to the City goals, objectives, and policies of the Plan. LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan is the most broad of all the Elements'. It includes "City-wide" policies, which are applicable across all designations and Residential, Centers, Commercial, and Employment Area designation policies, which are applicable only to representative zones. • F NAR.RATIVE Page 2 of8 .' City,:, Wide"Policies City-wide policies of the Land Use Element of the Plan include the following subsections: • Airport Compatible Land Use, • Annexations, • Historical and Archaeological Resources, • Non-conforming Uses, • Public Facilities, and • Resource Lands. Airport Compatible Land Use policies were initially adopted in 2003. Those policies, however, were only applicable to the Urban Center -North area of the City. The current amendments to those policies expand the area impacted by the policies to include the remainder of the Airport Influence Area. In addition, policies related to "aviation overflight" have been added. Annexation policies have been revised to reflect current City policies related to priority for annexing certain types of land. Policy has been added that sets the stage for future City consolidation of fire and library districts and water/sanitary sewer providers. New policy on annexation of non-conforming uses has been added. References to the methods of annexation other than the petition method have been removed due to exclusive use of petitions for annexation. Urban Growth Area (UGA) policies have been separated from those of the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) since the UGA includes incorporated Renton and the P AA does not. The policies have been revised to add clarification and remove certain redundancies. The Historical and Archaeological Resources goal, objectives, and policies have been revised to reflect the results of an inventory of historic structures in the downtown. Generally, more realistic policies have been adopted based on feasibility of preserving resources. Although the City has had development standards regulating Non-Conforming Uses, there have not been corresponding policies in the Comprehensive Plan. That has been corrected with the formulation of non-conforming use and structure policies. The only significant change to the Public Facilities section is the incorporation of policies relating to medical facilities. Resource Lands policies have been revised to shift emphasis from large-scale agricultural activities, which no longer take place within the Renton UGA, to policies for small-scale commercial/non-commercial horticultural activities .. The Residential policies have been revised to create a stronger hierarchy based on density. The "Low Density Residential" designation includes Resource Conservation, •. ,_............-- NARRATIVE Page 3 of8 Residential 1 and new Residential 4 zoning. Low Density Residential designations are generally located on the fringe of the City and in environmentally critical environments. "Single Family Residential" (Residential 8 zoning comprises the largest residential designation and remains largely the same. The new "Medium Density Residential" designation replaces two designations, Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood. Medium Density Residential includes the Residential 10 and 14 zones. Several multi-family designations (Multi-Family Suburban Center, Multi-Family Neighborhood, and Multi-Family Infill) have been consolidated into a single designation, "Multi-Family Residential." Major revisions occurred within the Centers designation. Recognizing that several of the designated Centers would not evolve as originally envisioned, the Centers policies have been refocused to the Urban Center and the Highlands Subarea, designated as the Highlands Neighborhood Center. Renton's Urban Center consists of the Urban Center- North and Urban Center -Downtown. Policies previously included in a separate Downtown Element have been revised and incorporated into the Urban Center - Downtown section of the Land Use Element. The Center OfficelResidential designation does not have policy changes, but has been renamed "CommerciaIlOfficelResidential," more accurately reflecting the mixed-use nature of future development in these areas. The Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center designations have been reformed to more realistically reflect their linear configuration and named "Commercial Corridor." Each Commercial Corridor includes a node of more intense activity, identified as the "Corridor District." Special policies for each district relate to the unique situation at that location (auto sales, high pedestrian activity, high traffic volume). The former Employment Area -Institutional policies have been merged with the new Commercial Corridor policies due to their similar business nature. Areas previously referred to as Convenience Commercial have been redesignated as "Neighborhood Commercial." These smaller, local business areas are not envisioned to expand significantly. The Employment Area -Valley and Employment Area -Industrial designations have remained largely the same, with only minor revisions to update the policies. Insignificant remapping of both designations occurred in the vicinity of Interstate 405 on the west side of Renton as a response to expansion of the Commercial Corridor Automall District. COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT The new Community Design Element is derived from policies formerly included in the Land Use Element where they were arranged by land use type. Due to general difficulty in implementing the policies, they have been consolidated into a single element. Both new objectives and policies have been included with existing ones in this element. --------------------------------~------------~~ .• NARRATIVE Page 4 of8 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT The Transportation Element objectives and polices have been revised, and a new goal and several policies were added to primarily reflect the following: • Horizon year updated from 1990-2010 to 2002-2022, • New traffic modeling, • LOS index adjusted, • Project lists and associated financial plan updated, • Text and figures amended to reflect new modeling and horizon years, and • Redrafting of existing policies to clarify and remove redundancies. The new goal reflects the intent to work cooperatively with other jurisdictions and agencies for effective transportation planning. HOUSING ELEMENT Residential policies in the Land Use Element direct where housing is located, the type of housing allowed in given jurisdictions (i.e. single family), and the density at which it occurs (number of units per acre). The Housing Element refines densities, provides more direction for housing types (i.e., accessory dwelling units), and provides strategies for affordability in housing. The Comprehensive Plan Housing Element policies have been revised to reflect data obtained from the 2000 census. Policies encouraging bonuses for increased density have been eliminated, which may result in fewer housing units. On the other hand, new policies have been adopted to increase flexibility in housing types, such as cottage housing, which may add housing units. HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT The City of Renton has demonstrated its commitment to community with the addition of a new Element to the Comprehensive Plan, the Human Services Element. A goal of· creating "A community in which all members have the opportunity to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs, for the enhancement of their quality of life" is the foundation of a new body of objectives and policies. CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT The Capital Facilities Element includes policies that establish the Citywide level of service, how improvements will be financed, and links improvements with anticipated growth. Again, the data received from the 2000 census was used to update population and housing forecasts. , NARRATIVE Page 5 of8 Several Capital Facilities policies have been modified: • Level of service standards for existing facilities in areas the City has control over should be maintained at the current or higher level, • No deterioration of existing levels of service that the City has control over should occur, and • The levying of impact fees, such as school district fees, should be evaluated. UTILITIES ELEMENT Several revisions to Utility Element policies reflect the need to ensure that as areas annex into the City, development must meet City standards. Revisions are also based on changes to state legislation regarding annexation procedures and the requirement to meet Department of Ecology water quality standards. Solid Waste policies have been modified to reflect the anticipated closing ofthe Cedar Hills landfill, concern about potential privatization of the transfer system, and the diversion rate increase due to recycling that is offset by an overall increase in quantity. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT Minor modifications have been made to the Economic Development Element to reflect changed conditions in the City since the goals, objectives, and policies were initially adopted. Industrial economic development policies have been revised, based on the rezone from industrial of the Boeing Renton Plant Site in 2003. Greater emphasis has been placed on encouraging the opportunity for industrial uses to be in proximity to retail and office in the Employment Area -Valley. Economic development policies formerly in the Downtown Element, which has been eliminated,have been included in the Economic Development Element. PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, AND TRAILS ELEMENT Another new element, Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails, has been added to the Renton Comprehensive Plan. Objectives relating to this area of planning have previously been included in the Land Use Element. Now they are combined with additional objectives and both existing and new policies in a stand-alone element. Objectives and policies are intended to further the goal to "Provide a high quality, comprehensive park, recreation, open space, and trail system to meet the short-and long- term needs of current and future Renton residents." NARRATIVE Page 6 of8 ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT The Environmental Element has been revised to ensure consistency between the Growth Management Act COMA) and the Shoreline Management Act. Policies have been incorporated that address planning with the Endangered Species Act. Comprehensive Plan policies of both the Land Use Element and Environmental Element have been measured against GMA Best Available Science. New Element goals include: • Protect endangered species that pass through the City, while continuing to allow growth and • Manage shorelines of the state. New policies include: • Incorporation of the Endangered Species Act, • Incorporation of Best Available Science, and • Allow clustering of residential development for environmental protection. ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS The Comprehensive Plan Amendments require modification of Development Standards found in Renton Municipal Code, Title IV. The following Chapters have been modified: 4-2-010,020,060,070,080, 110,and120 . 4-3-020, 040, 050, and 095 4-4-070,080, 120, and 130 4-6-060 4-7-150 and 170 4-8-100 and 120 4-9-195,200, and 250 4-11-010,040,070, 120, 190, and 260 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP AMENDMENTS The following are Comprehensive Plan Map Amendments: #2003-M-2 (LUA-Ol-167): King County Public Health Department NE 4th Street Facility Applicant: City of Renton Property Owner: King County Proposal: Changing the Comprehensive Plan designation from Center Institution to Commercial Corridor to rezone from Light Industrial to Commercial Arterial. •• NARRATIVE Page 7 of8 #2003-M-7: Residential 4 Zoning (Citywide) Applicant: City of Renton Property: Citywide Proposal: Review Rural Residential designations to evaluate which properties are appropriate for R-4 zoning and make appropriate map amendments. #2004-M-Ol (LUA03-118): Jones Rezone on Maple Valley Highway Applicant: Troy Jones Property: 2904 Maple Valley Highway Proposal: Consider Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Options to Neighborhood Commercial and a rezone from R-IO to CA. #2004-M-02 (LUA-03-120): Sunset Heights Retirement Applicant: Hendrickson Famil~ . Property: 141 st Ave SE to 146t Ave SE between NE Sunset Blvd and NE 11 i h PI Proposal: Request Land Use Map Amendment from Residential Rural to Residential Medium Density with concurrent rezone from RR to R-l O. #2004-M-03 (LUA-03-119): AnMarco / Old Stoneway Concrete Plant Site Applicant: AnMarco Property: 1920 Maple Valley Highway Proposal: Land Use Map Amendment and Rezone from COR to Commercial Corridor designation and Commercial Arterial zoning. #2004-M-04 Revisions to the Employment Area-Valley and Automall Applicant: City of Renton Property: Southwest Renton area Proposal: Expand the Automall to Oakesdale Avenue SW on the west and Williams A venue S on the east. This expansion will require adjusting the designations for land currently in the Employment Area -Valley to Employment Area -Industrial. #2004-M-05 Revisions to Centers, Institutional, and Residential Designations and Associated Zones Applicant: City of Renton Property: Citywide Proposal: Commercial Areas -Eliminate the Center Suburban and Center Neighborhood designations and replace them with a Commercial Corridor designation. The zoning would be Commercial Arterial. Incorporate the Center Institution designation into the new Commercial Corridor designation. The underlying zoning would be Commercial Corridor. Change the Convenience Commercial designation and zoning to Neighborhood Commercial. Residential Areas -Consolidate the Residential Multi- family Center Suburban, Residential Multi-family Neighborhood Center, and Residential Multi-family Infill into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone. Consolidate the Residential Options and Residential Planned Neighborhood designations into one, Residential Medium Density. The underlying zoning remains Residential 10 and Residential 14. --------------------------------------------~ .... NARRATIVE Page 8 of8 #2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard Applicant: City of Renton Property: 600 Block ofSW Sunset Boulevard and portions of the 400 and 700 Blocks, and a portion of the 300 Block of Stevens Avenue SW Proposal: Redesignate a portion of single-family designated and zoned land, Single Family Residential and Residential 8, respectively, to the Comprehensive Plan designation Commercial Corridor with Commercial Arterial zoning. , Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are: The 2004 Critical Areas Ordinance (not a part of this submittal) to be adopted simultaneously with the Comprehensive Plan Amendments should provide added protection to land in critical areas and shorelines within the City. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: The Transportation, Capital Facilities, and Utilities Elements of the Comprehensive Plan have been reviewed and the policies updated based on recent estimates of demand for service. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. No conflicts with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for protection of the environment are anticipated by proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: ~~.e~ ... ~ Name Printed: REBECCA LIND Date: August 20, 2004 ENVCHLST.DOC REVISED 6198 ~ ~ .eA-- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 13 .1' D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (These sheets should only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and roqrams. You do not need to fill out these sheets for oroiect actions. Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? No increase in discharge, emissions, releases, or production of noise is anticipated. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life? The 2004 Critical Areas Ordinance (not a part of this submittal) to be adopted simultaneously with the Comprehensive Plan Amendments should provide added protection to wildlife and habitats within the City. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are: 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? No depletion of energy or natural resources would directly result from the proposed action. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are: 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands? The addition of a new "Parks, Recreation, Opens Space, and Trails" Element to the Comprehensive Plan should provide greater protection for areas of the City designated for protection, such as Greenways and Natural Areas. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 12 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N/A b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. As part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, policies of the Utilities Element have been revised. C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: ~.-c.....~. __ ~ b-.q ..e.-l-- Name Printed: REBECCA LIND Date: August 20, 2004 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 11 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: As part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, historical and archaeological policies within the Land Use Element have been revised. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. N/A b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? N/A d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? N/A e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. N/A f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. N/A g. Proposed measures to reduce or con~rol transportation impacts, if any: As part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, pOlicies of the Transportation Element have been revised. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. N/A b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. As part of the Comprehensive Plan amendment process, poliCies of the Capital Facilities Element have been revised. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 10 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? N/A b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? N/A c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and frown impacts, if any: N/A 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? N/A b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: A new "Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails" Element will to be added to the Comprehensive Plan. This Element addresses community- wide and regional recreational needs. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. N/A b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. N/A H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmenlal Checklist 20D4.doc 9 N/A I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: ' Adoption of 2004 Critical Areas Ordinance simultaneously with Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Although the number of units would depend upon market conditions in the future, it is anticipated that Comprehensive Plan amendments that encourage more extensive mixed-use development in Corridor Commercial Zones (formerly Center Suburban and Center Neighborhood) may result in additional middle-and/or low-income housing. Map amendments that result from an analysis of Residential 1 Zoned land that is not impacted by critical areas and therefore will be rezoned to Residential 4 would result in additional middle-to high-income housing. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Although the number of units would depend upon market conditions in the future, it is antiCipated that Comprehensive Plan amendments that result in larger lots in the Residential 8 Zone, Replacement of the Residential 5 Zone with larger lots in the new Residential 4 Zone, and Infill Development poliCies in all zones may result in fewer middle-and/or high-income housing. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: A new "Human Services" Element will to be added to the Comprehensive Plan. This Element addresses community-wide and regional housing needs. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. N/A b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: A new "Community Design" Element will to be added to the Comprehensive Plan. This Element addresses community-wide aesthetic issues. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 8 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. N/A 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Airport Compatible Land Use policies have been amended within the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? See attachment b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. N/A c. Describe any structures on the site. N/A d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? N/A e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? See attachment f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? See attachment g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has ~ny part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. N/A i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? N/A j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? N/A k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc t 7 1 b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N/A c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain N/A d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Adoption of 2004 Critical Areas Ordinance simultaneously with Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for· heating, manufacturing, etc. N/A b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. N/A c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: N/A 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. N/A 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. N/A 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N/A b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? N/A H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\EnvironmEmtal Checklist 2004.doc 6 system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system{s) are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. N/A 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. N/A d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: N/A 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: N/A __ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other __ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs __ grass __ pasture __ crop or grain __ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other __ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other __ other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? N/A c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. N/A d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: N/A 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: N/A Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other _______ _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other -:---:-:-_______ _ Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other _____ _ H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 5 t " b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. N/A c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: N/A 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. ' N/A 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. N/A 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4} Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 5} Does the proposal lie within a 1 DO-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. N/A 6} Does the proposal involve any'discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. N/A b. Ground Water: 1} Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. N/A 2} Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 4 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other ______ . N/A b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) N/A c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. N/A d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. N/A e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. N/A f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. N/A g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? N/A h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: N/A 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (Le., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. N/A H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 3 , '1 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Growth Management Act Mandated City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendments. 2. Name of applicant: City of Renton 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 1055 South Grady Way; Renton, WA 98055; Rebecca lind, Project Manager 4. Date checklist prepared: August 20,2004 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): NIA 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. N/A 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Final EIS (Feb 1993); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Supplemental EIS (Feb 1995); Boeing Renton Comprehensive Plan Amendment EIS (Oct 2003); 2004 Critical Areas Ordinance (not adopted) 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other: proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. N/A 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. N/A 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. See attachment 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Citywide for Comprehensive Plan text amendments. See attached maps for map amendments. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environmental Checklist 2004.doc 2 • DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST City of Renton Development Services Division OEVELOPIIAE 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 CITY OF~~NNtNG Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 ON AUG 26200 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: . ~ REef: .. The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all gover-~~Oal agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark deSignations. Answer these questiqns if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. . . The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Application\Environ~ental Checklist 2004.doc08/20104 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 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 iIi place, to provide the facilities within a specified time. For transportation, the specified time is six years from time of development. City of Renton policies which 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, which is based on the following process: • The City of Renton will adopt a multi-modal Transportation Plan, which will be consistent with regional plans and plans of neighboring cities. Improvements and programs of the Transportation Plan have beenwill be defined previouslyin the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. • The City of Renton Transportation Level of Service (LOS) Policy, consistent with King County Growth Management Countywide Planning Policies, that differs from the traditional LOS for arterials, 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 of the 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 of the improvement elements of the 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 haswill established-a concurrency by annually 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 annual test of the city-wide 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. The ConcurreRCy Management SystemTransportation Concurrency Regulations (Ordinance No. 4708, adopted 3-2-1998) and Guidelines and Procedures for Monitoring Transportation Concurrency (adopted 4-6-1998) comprises policies,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. II-lIO CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17l04 mitigation fee would be established during the SEP A review process and paid during the project development process. • 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. City vAde transportation plans, improvement costs, and development mitigation fees are to be based on the new Ltwel of Service (LOS) Policy disffi:lssed previollsly llllder the Street New/ork, Transit and HOV Chapters. Mitigation Payment System The development mitigation fairshare cost has been determined based on the 20 year transportation improvement program cost, the developer mitigation share of the cost of the 20 year transportation program, and the city wide total daily 'fehicle trip increase forecasted betvleen 1990 and 2010. The vehicle trip rate fee resllltmg from the above process has has been established at $75 per daily vehicle trip. The developer mitigation fee is based on the total daily increase ill 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 of the 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 ConCllrrency ManagementMitigation 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. 11-109 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Arterial Plan Post 20 Year ImprovemeFits North 4th Street Logan Avenue to S1:HlSet Boole'lard Talbot Road South South 43rd Street to Renton City Limit HOV Plan Post 20 Year Impro'letnents: N.E. 4th Street Monroe Avenue N.E. to Renton City Limit SunSet Boulevard N.E. Park Drive to Renton City Limit Benson Road or SR 515 Paget Drive to Renton City Limit 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 inter jurisdictional 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. Recent examples 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 of the 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 2Ol()...20-year transportation system improvement plan (defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan). • Determining the cost of the citywide 2Ol()...20-year transportation improvements related to...§!Wport new development. • Establishing a fee for developments' pro-rated share of the cost of the citywide ;;w.w....20-year transportation improvements (in addition to site-specific mitigation required by the City). This 11-108 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 TDM/CTR • Transportation Demand Management Program: implement Commute Trip Reduction Act requirements, other TDM programs (TIP #1518162631) 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 2()-20-year period (1995 20152002-2022), it is reasonably certain that the 20-year transportation program can be implemented. A 2010 transportation program has also been established having an estimated eost of approximately $119 million. This program addresses transportation needs to maintain Renton's level of serviee standard for the year 201O~ Assuming an annual funding level of $6.7 million, available funding betvr'een 1995 and . 2010 will total $100.5 million ($6.7 million times 15 years). Comparing the 2010 program eost to potential funding results in a $19.0 million (or 19%) shortfall. _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 2Q.W-2022 transportation program can be achieved. The City of Renton's proposed 2000 200502 20072003 20082004 20092005-2010 Six-Year TIP includes 4353545956 individual projects and programs, with a total estimated cost of $141,127,241103,299,690113,234,468136.4179.15 million. Of this total cost, approximately $132.287.2102.1124.4164.2 million is to be expended over the 2000200220034 20052007200892005- 2010 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 $8.916.1 $-l-l-:-l-15 million represents expenditures prior to year 20002002200320042005. The projected revenues over the six-year period; based on the established $6.7 million annual funding ... le¥el-;--will total $40.2 million. The TIP identified expenditures of $132.2103.3$113.2124.4164.2 million is $92.063.1$7384.2124 million more than the projected revenues. Of this $92.063.1$7384.2.0124 million, approximately $72-4464 million represents the amount of participation anticipated by the stateState, Sound Transit, King County, City of Tukwilaneighboring jurisdictions, City of Kent, 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 $20.029.1$ 3944.260 million. 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. Several transportation improvements included in the Arterial and HOV Plans are identified as post 20 year imprml'ements. These improvements have been identified to support land use and neighborhood and business goals and improve safety in the intervening years beyond 2015. The following is a list of these transportation improvements. JI-I07 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Walkways/Sidewalks Implementation. The implementation procedures for the City's comprehensive walkway/sidewalk program is detailed in the City of Renton Comprehensive Walk Program Preliminary Engineering ReportCitywide 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. The oorreHtly identified sidewalk need is identified as 8.33 miles of walkway with an estimated cost of $1.5~ million. There are approximately 250 oorb ramps needed citywide. The estimated cost of ramp construction is $250,000. Funding for these programs is provided through Business License Fees. The walkway program is currently being !!pdated aBel, based on established criteria, sidev/alk improvements 'Hill be identified and prioritized for implementation. Bike Facilities Implementation. Bicycle facilities include lanes along roadways and signed bicycle routes. Current funding is provided for the construction of segments of the Lake Washington Loop Trail. Bicycle route designation and signing along City roadways will--be~ provided on an as-needed basis Qywith cOHCurnimce bet'tveen the Transportation Systems Division of the Planning/-Building/Public Works Department aBel the Community Seryices Department. Project prioritization will be~ determined by these two departments the Transportation Systems Division in coordination with the Communicy Services Department. Funding for bicycle sigrung is provided through the capital improvement programs and the General Fund operating budgets of the Transportation Systems Division aBel Commanity Services Department. Signing specifically identified as part of transportation projects will be funded through the Six -Year Transportation Improvement Program {TIP}. Trails Implementation. The Trails Plan is a City of Renton ColIlHlUBity Services program that supplements aBel Many of the 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 of the transportation system, and, therefore, isare coordinated with the Transportation Plan. The Long Range, Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Master 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) ~ Trails Construction Costs. A 1990 plan.'1ing le\'el coastruction cost estimate was prepared for the proposed trail system by the Community Seryices Department. The cost estimate was calculated based upon the type of facility (paved, unpaved, boardwalk) on a per linear foot basis. The sources of the estimate were pnwious City projects; aBel those completed prior to 1990 include a 4 % aHHUal iBflation rate adjustment. Finally, a 38% contingency factor was added to the cost estimate, resulting in a final estimated cost of $9,544 ,000. l\dditional iHformation concerning the· cost estimate is available in the Trails Master Plan. The Trails Master Plan contains the recommeBeled six year trails development program. (Note: An update of the Trails Master Plan, which will provide new information on the trails development program and cost estimates, is anticipated to be completed in 2000.) 11-106 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~081l7/04 Transit • Transit Program: transit CeH:ter and facilities to support regional transit service, local transit service improvements; development of park and ride lots, transit amenities (TIP #54368) Downtown Transit Access: improvements to enhance transit access to Renton's Urban Center (TIP IR1 • Renton Urban Shuttle (RUSH) Program: operation of the ),«lnton Urban Shuttle (RUSH)shuttie bus service within Renton. (TIP #.g.g.5) • Transit Priority Signal System: development and implementation of traffic signal programming to give priority to transit vehicles. (TIP #~9) Also, the HOV Chapter improvements identified below will be designed to enhance transit service. HOV SR 900 HOY I Houser Way COIlflection (Completed) th • SR-167 / S.W. 2T Street HOV (TIP #M9+2) • Sound Transitl 405 I SR 515 HOV Direct Access (TIP #2429272023) I 405 I N.B. 44th Street HOY (TIP #4J) • SR-169 HOV -Sunset Blvd. to east City Limits (TIP #-1-1-21) Park Drive N.E/Sunset Blvd. HOV (TIP #31) It should be noted that the expenditure shown for I-4Q5-Sound Transit HOV Direct Access -(TIP #24 29272023) is for coordination with the State and Sound Transit direct access interchange improvements. Included in the Six-Year TIP is the Arterial HOV Program (TIP #13141243), which will provide funding for further development of Renton HOV improvements identified previously in the HOV Plan (Figure 3- 1), to examine additional routes and corridors for HOV facilities in Renton, and for coordination with direct access HOV projects. Non-Motorized • Lake Washington Boulevard Bike/Ped Impro'r'ements (Completed) N.E. 44111 to Coulon Park (TIP #242227)Benson Road Improvements South 26th to Main Avenue (TIP #17) Oakesdale AYeooe S.W. Bike/Ped Improvements (Completed) • CBD Bike and Pedestrian Connections (TIP #3844412326) Also included in the proposed Six-Year TIP is the Walkway Program (TIP #6549), which will provide funding for sidewalk and handicap curb ramp needs identified in the City of Renton Comprehensive Walk Program Preliminary Engineering ReportCitywide Walkway Program. The Bicycle Route Development Program (TIP #3541383336) 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 projects and the City of Renton Trails Master Plan.}". Implementation of the non-motorized element falls into three--two categories -walkways/sidewalk, and bike facilities and trails. Each of these compoQents are described below. 11-105 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/l7/04 • Street Network Park Avenue North Bronson Way to North 10th Street (Completed) Roeser Way Relocation Senset Boele'/ard to North 8th Street (Completed) Main Avenue Soeth Grady Way to South 3'" Street (Completed) • South 2"" Street Rainier Allenue to Main Avenee Soeth, Phase 1 (TIP #2~South Lake Washington Roadway Improvements (TIP #~1O) • Rainier Avenue -SW 4th Place to SW 7th Street (TIP #~16) Lake Washington Boelevard Bridge (Completed) Monster Road Bridge (Completed) Oakesdale AYenue S. W. Phase 1 S. w. 16th to S. W. 27th (Completed) Oakesdale Avenue S.W. S.W. 19th to S.W. 27th Street, Phase m (TIP #2) N.E. 3rd Street Senset Boele'/ard to Monterey Drive N.E. (Completed) • s-"w"'-Grady Way Rainier A:venue to Talbot RoadMain Avenue to West City Limits (TIP #3783235) • Lind Avenue S.W. -=-S.W. 16th_-Street to S.W. 43rd_-Street (TIP #39454245) • Duvall Ave N.E. -~Sunset Boulevard to Renton City Limits (TIP #12101128) • S. w. 16th Street Oakesdale Avenee S. W. to Lind Allenee S. W. (Completed) Oakesdale Avenue S.W. S.W. 27111 Street to S.W. 31st Street, Phase 2 (TIP #3'I) • Oakesdale Allenee S.W. Monster Road to SR 900 (TIP #43~Mill Avenue South / Carr Road (TIP #M48) • Strander Boulevard -SR-181 to Oakesdale Avenue S.W. (TIP #10973) • Grady Way / Rainier Avenee (TIP #378 and #53)Sunset Boulevard/Duvall Avenue nNE (TIP #-R2Q) • Benson Road South 26th Street to South 31"t Street (TIP #6 and #474446) • N.E. 3rd/N.E. 4th Corridor Improvements (TIP # 4M(8) • Rainier A venue Corridor Study/Improvements (TIP #7)222{) • Lake Washington Blvd. Park Avenue North to Coulon Park (TIP #23213437) . • Park Avenue North/Sunset Boulevard North 6th to Duvall Avenue N.E. (TIP #373444) • S.W. 7th Street/Lind Avenue S.W. (TIP #46433755) • South Renton Neighborhood Improvements (#~12) • N.E. 4th-/Hoguiam Avenue N.E. (TIP #4815)S248 It·shoeld be noted that the Also included are expenditures shown for study of the SR J69 Corridor {TIP project #~11) (Grady Way/Rainier Avenee) is for studies. Included in the Six-Year TIP is the Arterial Circulation Program (TIP #2126241318), 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 #22272514) for development of future TIP projects and grant applications for currently proposed and future TIP projects. . The City of Tukwila's 1999 2004 Six Year Transportation Impro'/ement Program incledes an arterial improllement previoosly identified in the Street NetvlOrk Chapter. This project is the S. 180th Street'RR Grade Separation. In addition, the City of Kent plans to extend Lind A:venee from S.W. 43rd Street to East Valley Road. This project woeld compliment the City of Renton'S TIP project #394542 . . II-I04 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPOR1 .ON ELEMENT Revised 6IW0408/17/04 TABLE 8.3 CITY OF RENTON SIX-YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM TIP Project TItle 1 Ireet ov day Proaram 2 l167/S' , 27\1 : Bv -3 Bv/SW 27th St :Onnect. 4 IH69 I IV .14Oth to 8 t90CI II tenton Irban ~uttle I~ JSHl • ranslt Proaram 7 :aliller Av Corridor studvt Improv. • IE 3rdINE 4th Corridor • rProaram 10 i L. ,e .... ash. Roadway Imorov. tt :SR &9 Corridor Stullv 12 IsOL I-Ftenton Prolec 1$ II-4Cl In Renton ,. IProlect -ti INE 4th IIItlWftlIuh,,,, Av NE -,i Iblnl., Av • S1 '7th." 040., PI 17 Benson Rd • ~ 26th to Main ,. "rtlllal I Proaram 111 Brldae I & Reoalr -20 .00D : Program 21 Sian : Program 22 Poi. Proaram -» Sau~ rranslt HOV Direct Aecess 24 TraMe 5afetv Proaram Z5 rraM r Program 28 CB[ k., Pad. 27 I(..tar ~ ~al . Proa, 21 )uvall Ave NI 211 ~ iR I Safety Proa. 31 DM Proaram 32 'rans 3i IMlss/na Unk$ Program S4 lOis ........... 35 3i I BICM:la ROL StudY )aV. Program 37 I Lake WaSh: sa .parlt to Coulon Pk mal Coc,rd. sa 40 &00. creeK corr. 41 IVSOOT" I "rQll!ltm 42 l%fortheArts 4S ~rterJal HOV Proaram 44 LInd Av.sW 16th. SW 43rd ElaMOn Rd SIS 31st St . oaan Av , Panel RePair :arrlMllJ Sianal 'ranslt PrioritY Sianal S~lII 150 'rans I Cant., Video lou .. \lliy S • Main to Burnett 112 'ran!! Valley In aka Was Elv Slip Plana lanst ... Road Brldaa -W7th SUUnd Ave SW 118 luvall Ava NE • Kina County 'otlll Sftur.,... --- (2000 20052003 20082004 20092005-2010) ,. '., I 11 1: 5 10 7. 12 1.280.315 28.391 5010 77 68 2006 AM. 10. 8IJ 1( 3 5C 00 18. 00 3( 00 1 00 211.COO OC 2 a: 1 ).C 1.2 3 a: e 4 30.1 Xl 35.1 )Q 35.1 '1C JOI .5( JOI 1( JOI '2! JOI !00t s· 5.000 10.000 i.(a: 1 ~EOO 1 00 :2 123 1.311 142 7.986166 2008 405.CXXl 10.000 2 ~ ec 250,C 2o.OC 175.000 2.15C 01 2C 14C 21 4 1 00: ).00 JO 1: a: a: 75.00: Ctl 0.( 0.1 EO .• 5.000 1C a: 5.CXX 2.810.SIX 9.710.700 . Total Prclect Costs 2007 20( 405.000 4U 10, 10 2 2 :2 25C OOC 10.CXX 2[ .00[ 855.CXX 200.000 4l1.00c 2(1.000 r.5lO 21>.000 40.000 7f oa: 10.000 206.000 ,.f.OCXl 11.1.200 4000 8 00 00 1. 00 10.000 30.0100 300.000 20.000 5. 'I 160, 10 :200.CXXl 2Q 00 815: 00 -20.000 7.500 25.'JOO 10.' 500. 340. 84.2C '10.000 3(KX -20.000 230.000 110.0IXl ·25.000 10.000 50.0100 1.691.000 1.914.0IXl . <I6O.OIXl 340.0IXl 81(00[ I1-1OJ 2Q(8 405. OC J.IJOO 2. 104 20CCXX 250.00c 4Q.OOC 20.000 7.SOC 25.CXXl 40.000 3COC 410.000 230.000 84.00 1( 3( 20. 1.81o.CXX 80.001 25.000 10.000 3Q000 1.059.000 826.000 4CX>.00: 66.821.100 2011 4C CXXl i,CXXl 3, 2. 2IX CXX 2fij 00 3000 21 000 500 2CXX 40.000 3O.CXX 5.000 100.000 2C '''1OJ 1.0 1.000 1.000 25.00 1t 000 30000 1( 00: .... A 6.0 1:12.4 41 01 1.3 OC 9:lE:ooD 1. 1. 228:000 12.000 285.00 5. OC 5D.:IO .2:!o. 2.5 JO ex: 4 mooc 810.0100 1n0lX t.OO 1.42: 4.1 '.14: 4 17<1 A 1 1.1 11.7 .00 1.1 4'1.45 1,0 1. Xl. 3 •• rO.1 ~1. Xl Tb25.411 1 '.441 ~4Z 2 1.3741 1.52:3 1. 140 .. : 1.112' , 3.U18! ., 211.35C 194.874 5 is.SOC 18.572 )8.71' 12.3OC 78.857 MII.ex )0 . lD • 7 ~,IX '1.3' 1.315 ).(00 JO 00 00 - CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT , Revised ~8/17/04 Taken as a whole, the five categories provide a framework for evaluating projects both individually and as part of a strategy that seeks to meet and balance the transportation needs of Renton during a time of increasing transportation demand, decreasing revenues and growing environmental concerns. Although each project can be identified with an important concern that allows it to be classified into one of the five categories, most projects are intended to address, and are developed to be compatible with, multiple goals. Preservation of the existing infrastructure is a basic need that must be met by the program. The Mayor, City Council and Citiiens 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 facilities projects that-seF¥efacilitate the movement of transit and carpools, and 'I programs that promote the use of high occupancy vehicles (HOV's) and reduce the numbersof 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. Operations and safety projects and programs are developed through ongoing analyses of the transportation system and are directed mainly toward traffic engineering concerns such as safety and ' congestion. Projects are identified not only by analysis of traffic counts, accident records and geometric data, but also through review and investigation of citizen complaints and requests. The City of Renton's adopted 20002002200320052005200720082010 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 the-various 20002002200342005 2005 2007200892~1O TIP projects under each of the chapters of the Transportation Element. I1-102 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 It is anticipated that 20 year (2000 2020) data will be a';ailable from the PSRC in 2000. An 1:Ipdated 20 year transportation plan and level of service check based on this data will be prepared at that time. The 2010 transportation program mooing needs have been S\lffiffi:arized on Table 8.1. The arterial and HOV cost component includes those improvements previously identified in the Street Network and HOV Chapters as needed by 2010 to provide the adopted standard level of service. Transit funding need represents Renton's local match of the cost of transit improvements to support the adopted 2010 IflYel of service standard. The City of Renton's Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is part of an on-going process intrinsically linked with the development of the City's Capital Improvement Program. The Six-Year TIP is also linked with various state and federal funding programs, regional/inter/jurisdictional planning and coordination processes, and the City's Growth Management Act Comprehensive Land Use Plan. Projects are developed and prioritized based on both specific goals to be achieved by the program and on general programming considerations. Those general programming considerations are: Planning. How a project fits with or addresses identified future transportation goals, demands, and planning 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 acquisition of outside grants, formation of LIDs or the receipt of mitigation funds. Prioritization has to take into account the peculiarities of each of the . various fund sources and the probabilities of when, and how much, money will be available. Scheduling. If a project is interconnected with, or interdep~ndent on, other projects taking place, it is reflected in their relative priorities. 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 TIP is evaluated and analyzed. They are: I • Preservation of Existing Infrastructure • 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 I s transportation program in response to input from citizens and local officials and to State and federal legislation. 11-101 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 owners of property equal to two-thirds of the assessed valuation of the 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. 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 for GMA) and the underlying assumptions, which are: • to provide both a 20-year and a six-year transportation improvement program • to provide a 2010 transportation plan to test against the level of service standard • establish consistency between the six-year, and 20-year and 2010 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, and if the 2010 plan (15 year) meets the level of service standard, it should be reasonable to assume that the level of service can be maintained for the intervening years with the established funding rate. . The above approach is necessitated because only 2010 data is available for checking level of service. Information is not available from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) for either a six year or 20 year plan. To check the validity of the above assumptions, an existing level of service check will be made each year with the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) submittal. This will further ensure that the level of service will be maintained within the adopted standard each year as 'Nell as for the year 2QlO.,. II-I 00 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 TABLE 8.2 CITY OF RENTON SOURCE OF TRANSPORTATION FUNDS Annual Business License Fee $ 1.8~9 million Half-Cent Gas Tax $ 0.~35 million Vehicle License Fee ~ (L~3 minien Grants $ 3 $7-90 million Developer Mitigation $ 0.57 million * TOTAL FUNDS: $ 6.7Q million * In addition ... there will be site-specific mitigation. 20-Year $ 37 .8-~million $ &.47.0 million $ +. 9 minien $ 7-h48.0 million $ 11.4 million * $134.0 million 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 and the Vehicle License Fee are is assumed to remain at its current levels and together contribute ±O5. 2 % of the 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 Enhancement which are awarded regionally by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) and bridge. replacement, road safety and railroad crossing improvement programs administered by WSDOT. State grants include those provided by the Transportation Partnership Program (TPP),. -and the Arterial Improvement Program (AlP), 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% of the 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 prop~rties. Petitions from two-thirds of the property 11-99 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 TABLE 8.1 RENTON 20-YEAR TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATES Arterial Plan: = $ 55,699,000 *60,000,000 HOV Plan: = $ 33,090,00026,000,000 Transit Plan: = $ 15,000,000 Non-motorized Plan: = $ 4,611,0004,500,000 Annual Programs: = i 25,600,00028,500,000 Total 20-Year Cost = $ 134,000,000 RENTON 2010 TR..h.~SPORTATION PROGRAM PLANNING LEVEL COST ESTIMATES Arterial Plan: -$ 52,550,000 * HOV Plan: -$ 33,090,000 Transit Plan: -$ 11,250,000 Non motorized Plan: -$ 3,000,000 AllfN:lal Programs: -i 19,200,000 Tatal 2010 Cast -$ 119,090,000 * Central Business District Component $13,000,000 II-98 I CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Also included on Table 8.1, is the cost summary for a 2010 transportation plan which pro'lides a le'lel of service standard in support of Renton's 2010 land use plan. Included are Renton's costs (in 1999 dollars) for traHSportation impro'/ements idelltified in the l\rterial and HOV plans as needed by 2010. The transit costs represent local match for impro'lements in support of the Transit Plan. Non motorized. costs and aooual program costs are included as they support and supplement the other elements of the 2010 . transportation plan. Costs are HOt included for State, King Couaty, other cities, local transit or regional transit impro'lement projects. A list of the projects and programs in the 20 year and 2010 transportation plans and plilfHliag le¥el cost estimates for each are provided in the City of Renton Transportation Mitigation Fee Support Document, Appendix A. l'. listing of 20 year and 2010 potential transit capital and ser'lice impro'lemems and their costs are pro'lided in the Renton Transit Plan Support Document. Ongoing transportation planning work will include continued, refmement of the 2010 and 20-year I transportation plans and their-costs. Inventory of Funding Sources Having established a 20-year transportation funding level of $134 'million, an annual funding level of $6.7 million can be determined. Sources of revenue to provide this annual funding need are identified on Table 8.2. The Business License Fee is an annual per capita fee assessed to all businesses within the City of Renton. Currently, 85 % of the annual revenue generated from this fee is dedicated to fund transportation improvements. The Business License Fee is assumed to contribute 28% of the future annual funding level. The Vehicle License Fee is a local option transportation financing mechanism adopted by King County. The City of Renton, as well as other municipalities, receive a portion of the revenue generated by this fee based on population. 11-97 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 • Strategies and actions for financing and implementing the transportation plan over the next -l$-t&-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: T -YV: Pursue adequate funding for transportation improvements from all potential sources in an efficient and equitable manner. T -¥W: 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 -6064. 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-6l65. Coordinate equitable public/private partnerships to help pay for transportation improvements. Policy T -&66. Pursue federal, state and local sources of funding (e.g. loans, matching funds) for transportation improvements. Transportation Program Costs Policy T -6J67 . 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 -6468. 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. To determine transportation fmancing needs, a twenty-year (+9%-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, which 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 of the 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) is 1999 sollars. 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, trassit ceHter, park:-and:-ride lots, signal priority and transit amenities. 11-96 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 • 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. • Continuation of the 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 is expectedhas plans to add a third and a fourth track to its mainline along the western edge of the City by the year 2001. A fourth track is mcpected by 2004. UPRR is-also has expected plans to add a third additional track to its mainline that runs parallel to and is in close proximity to the BNSF mainline. Also planned is theA grade separation of the BNSF and UPRR mainlines at South 180th Street in Tukwila (S.W. 43rd Street in Renton) was completed in 2003. These improvements are a constructive first step towards improving rail freight travel along the western boundary of the City of Renton and associated freight rail travel passing through Renton. The Freight Mobility Strategic Investment Board (FMSIB): • 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 27th IStrander Boulevard project to receive $4,000,000. It is anticipated these funds will be programmed by 2006. 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 of the transportation plan. The Financing and Implementation Chapter includes: • Goals, objectives and policies relating to financing and implementation of the transportation plan. • Information on current revenue sources and future revenues. • Assessment of Renton's 20-year (1995 to 2015) and 2010 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. I1-95 I. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mfC)408/17/04 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 Valle), industrial area (southwest Renton) is directly connected to the regional system via the S.W. 43J:l! 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 A venue and Grady Way, which provide direct access to SR-167 and to 1-405 (via the SR-18111-405 and SR-167/1- 405 interchanges). Truck access to the North Renton industrial area (north of downtown Renton and west of 1-405) from 1-405 is provided via the designated truck route on Park A venue North. Another truck route to 1-405 and SR-167 from the North Renton industrial area is via North 61hth Street, Airport Way and Rainier Avenue. Truck and industrial traffic access from 1-405 to the King County waste transfer station and m~intenance shops east ofI-405 is provided via the Sunset and Maple Valley (SR- 169) interchanges and N.E. 3rd fELStreet-N.E. 4th taStreet. The Stoneway Sand and Gravel complex, also eastwest of 1-405, generates industrial traffic that uses the Maple Valley HigmvayNorth 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. The Regional Transit Plan (Sound Move), appro'led by voters in 1996, will provide comnmter rail service beginning in the year 2000. PhmsFuture plans call for additional commuter rail trains te \lS@using the BNSF main line, with a stepand stopping at the new-Renton/Tukwila (Longacres) station located just south of I 405. 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 of the 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, PTA). 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. 11-94 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mf0408/17/04 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 insure 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 ~ommercial areas of the City. Existing rail lines bordering the City of Renton include the Union Pacific (UPRR) and Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF) main line tr~cks 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. Omy 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 (Longacres) station located just south of 1-405.' The BNSF 18th_-Subdivision Branch Line splits from the BNSF ~ain 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 of the BNSF main line spur tracks and the BNSF branch line results in minimal disruption to vehicular traffic movement in Renton. The UPRR mainIine track, located 200 to 300 feet west of the BNSF maimine and Renton's City limits, also runs in a north-south direction. The UPRR maimine is a single track, carrying a somewhat lower level of freight freight-omy service. 11-93 CITY OF RENTON TRANSP<J .. , t'ATION ELEMENT Revised 6mI0408117/04 FIGURE 7-1 TRUCK ROUTES Truck Routes Legend Truck Route - City Umit .... " I .... Transportation Plan .II~92 I NccToScalc , '. ,.", CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Truck Routes The City has a system of truck routes (see Figure 7-1). Until October, 1991, the system had been informal, comprising only advisory signs on the routes. With the City Council adoption of the Truck Route Ordinance, the truck route system became a regulatory syst~m. Trucks weighing over 26,000 pounds gross vehicle weight are restricted to operating on one of the 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 of the 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, and emergency vehicles. II-91 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 4 . It is recommended that this Master Plan be coHtinHally reyie'Ned and updated as needed to take advantage of increased technological improvements, to confirm forecasts and to review the staaaards associated with airport de'/elopment. (Status: ongoing) The 1988 Master Plan Update did HOt clearly delineate findings and recommendations. Instead, recommeooatioHS for policy considerations were identified (see 1988 Update, page 69). Implementation of the Airport Master Plan Implementation The airport development and fInancial plan portions of the 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 of the 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: T~: Maintain existing freight rail service to Renton commercial and industrial sites. T -ST: Maintain truck access between Renton industrial areas and the regional highway system. T-±U: Minimize the impact of truck traffIc on general traffIc circulation and on Renton neighborhoods. Policies Policy T -sJS7. 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 -s4S8. Design tTransportation facilities should be designed in a manner thatto compliments railroads. . Policy T-$SS9. Locate s~ur tracks should be located to provide a minimum number of street crossings and serve a maximum number of sites. 11-90 Policy T -"60. Support s~trategies to minimize adverse impacts of railroad operations on adjacent residential property should be supported. Policy T-S+61. Support railroad crossing improvements that minimize maintenance and protect the street surface. Policy T -s862. Where warranted, provide protective devices, such as barriers and warning signals~ on at-grade crossings. Policy T -$963. The City should continue to work with local, regional, State and Federal agencies to address regional freight needs and to mitigate local impacts. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 while supporting increased efforts to curb aircraft noise. The Finding and Recommendations of the Airport Business Plan are incorporated into this Comprehensive Plan by this reference. 1978 Airport Master Plan Findings 1. Renton Municipal Airport is developed almost to capacity. (Slfltus: unchanged) 2. Seaplane activity is accommodated on the. airport and does not have its O'Nn identifiable facility. (St8tus: unchanged) . 3. There is substantial demand for airport/seaplane base space within the region served by the airport. (Sl8tus: unchanged) 4 . The ability of the Renton Municipal Airport to satisfy this demand is limited by the physical constraints of the site. (Status: 18 he re evaluated) 5 . The character of general ayiation flying at Renton will continue its slov; shift from pleasure flying to business flying over the next twenty years. (St8tus: unqhanged) 6. Most improvements that can be made to the airport are "fine tuning" of design features to increase capacity, improve efficiency, or enhance safety .. (Status: 18 he re emluated) 7. The installation of a microwave landing system (MLS) in the future is possible; howeYer, the landing minimums are limited by high terrain west of the field. (Slfltus: MLS system has heen canceled) 8. Unrestricted auto access to the aircraft operating areas needs to be controlled. (Status.' access has heen restricted) 9. The use of Boeing Apron C space for parking of additional general a';iation aircraft v/ould increase the capacity of the field. (Status: unchanged) , 10. The relocation of Taxiway A closer to the runway would gain approximately 80 aircraft parking spaces. (Sl8tus.' unchanged) 11. The environmental impacts of new development are minimal for the airport. (Slfltu5: to he re e"'8luated) 12. The most ad';erse environmental impact for the airport is associated with the jet testing facilities in Boeing Area A. (SlfltUS: 18 he re evaluated) 13. The costs of development of the airport and seaplane base are approximately $1,620,000. (Status: updated) 1978 Airport Master Plan Reeommendations 1. It is recommended that the improveInents for the Renton Municipal Airport and Will Roger Wiley Post Memorial Seaplane Base be adopted as presented in the Master Plan Report. (Status: unchanged) 2. It is recommended that all short temi improvements given in this Master Plan Study be implemented by 1982. (Status: some impFol'ements have heen made). 3. It is recommended that the Boeing Company further investigate ways to mitigate the noise associated with the engine testing facilities. (Sl8tus: ongoing) I1-89 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mI0408/17/04 The seaplane base provides facilities only for· small general aviation types of aircraft (both personal and revenue-producing). The past few years have shown an increase in the been cyclical for the charter seaplane businesses utilizing the Renton Airport facilities and the seaplane base. 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. 1997 Airport Master Plan Relevant Dotumentsand the 2002 Renton Municipal Airport Business Plan 1997 Airport Master Plan --lm The Airport Master Plan for the Renton Municipal Airport was last updated in 1997 and approved by the City Council in August 1997. The update study was funded jointly by the Federal Aviation Administration, and the City of Renton to determine the existing and future role of the airport and to provide the City with information and direction in the future planning and continued development of the airport. The objective of the 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. Every few years the Airport Master Plan is updated as necessary to reflect progress and changes from the original Master Plan. It should be recognized that the 1997 Airport Master Plan addresses aviation facilities only. The City has other off-site related responsibilities that are not addressed in detail by the Master Plan, including maintenance of waterways, land use compatibility, zoning, aviation-related restrictions on building . height, etc. Other studies and planning documents that have been initiated over time relating to the growth and development of the Renton Municipal Airport include the original 1978 Master Plan and subsequent 1988 and 1997 Master Plan update§.. The 1997+8 Master Plan Findings and Recommendations are listed below. incorporated into the Comprehensive Plan by this reference. The 1997 Airport Master Plan should be updated in 2005J or 20064 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 of the Renton City Council. The purpose of the plan was to review business potential for the aAirport and develop a plan for the management and operation of the aAirport, giviBggiven 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 aAirport. The recommendations reaffirmed the mix of uses presently at the aAirport 11-88 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 • The use of space at the airport should be maximized. Wherever possible, land uses should be condensed. • Airport leases that need runway access should have priority. (The airport flightline is a limited resource and should not be given to uses which could operate elsewhere.) In addition, Renton is the only publicly-owned seaplane facility in the area-region and, therefore, seaplane access deserves a priority along the lake shore. • The Community Service Alternative response to demands for use of the Renton Municipal Airport should be the Balanced Response to maintain General general Aviation aviation basing capacity. (This option seeks to avoid the loss of general aviation parking areas on the west side apron because of lease recaPture by Boeing. Boeing would take over the southeast corner of the airport, displacing non Boeing general aviation uses to the west side of the airport.) Airport Facilities The Renton Municipal Airport has become one of the is a major general aviation airportsairport 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 It-is owned by the City of Renton and is located in the northwest corner of the city, bounded generally on the east by the Cedar River, on the west by the-Rainier Avenue North, and on the north by Lake Washington~ (See-see Figure 1.1~)' The Airport consists of approximately 165.4670 acres. It is oblong in shape, and has one runway with two parallel taxiways twith concrete and blacktop surfaces and artificial drainage). The Airport is classified as a Basic Transport/Relieyer airport. 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 (REIL) 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 an 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 150,000115,000 landings and take-offs per year take place at the Airport, making it the thir6-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 commercial airline and military operations. Consequently, nearly all of the 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. 11-87 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Policy T -4852. 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 -4953. 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. Policy T -S054. CHrrent airport land Hse strategy, which reqHires the Boeing Company to '/acate the west side of the airport Hpon the expiration of their lease in 2010, shoHld be contiooed.Lease airport property for aviation- related uses that create jobs and expand the City's tax base. Policy T -Sl55. Promote the relocation of indHstrial and office Hses that do not reqHire direct access to taxiways and the runway, to off airport sites. ContinHe to lease AiIJ>ort real estate for aviation related pHIJ>oses that create family wage jobs both on and off the AiIJ>ort. Policy T -s256. The Renton Municipal Airport provides the only pHblicly publicly-owned seaplane facility in the area and, therefore, the northern shoreline of the airport should be restricted to seaplane access. Paliey T. Attempt to ac@ire, as it becomes a'lailable, the property 'Nithin the RHHWay Protection Zone (RPZ) for RllllWay 33, between aiIJ>ort related height restrictions 32 teet to 70 teet above sea lenl to increase public safety. Pali" T S. Adopt the AiIJ>ort Master Plan and the AiIJ>ort &siness Plan as the foHodation for the aiIJ>ort section of the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy T -s256.1. Develop appropriate land use plans and regulations for structures and vegetation within the airport's runway approach zone. Policy T -s256.2. Heights of structures should be "stepped down" within the runway approach zone per FAA, Part 77 standards. Policy T-s256.3. DevelopmentProperty within the Object Free Area (OFA) of the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) at the south end of the runway should be permitted Hnder FAA standards. The remainder of the RPZ (i. e. Controlled Activity Area) shoold exclHde Hses or structu£es that create a ha2iard or obstacle to llCl'Iigation or that typically. incffide flHblic assembly (e.g. chHrches, schools, stadimns, large office bHildings, regional shoflfling centers).acquired using funding provided by the Federal Aviation Administration. (NG+BNote: These areas are described in the Airport Master Plan and governed by both local and federal regulations. The City will continue to work with the FAA to balance the land use and public safety issues related to these areas.) The following policies governing the development of airport land uses were derived from the 2002 Renton Municipal Airport Business Plan and theThe Renton Airport Master Plan: • A balanced mix of aviation should be served. Future proportions of based general aviation should not be allowed to vary significantly from current fleet mix. The basing capacity for light General general Aviation aviation aircraft should be maintained at about 260 aircraft. The number of based business aircraft should be kept to less than 20 % of the total of non- Boeing General general Aviation aviation aircraft on the field. Leasing policy and negotiations may be a tool for implementation. • The City'S airport ownership should not extend further east across the Cedar River without appropriate legislative review. Property on the east side of the north Boeing bridge was acquired by the City using Airport Funding in 1968 . . II-86 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~081l7/04 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 (TMP's) for new residential, commercial, and office developments. These TMP's have usually been put in place through SEPA agreements. At some poinUn the future, the City may consider adopting a developer-based Transportation Demand Management ordinance (with site design and other requirements) to compliment the employer-based CTR ordinance and its employer worksite requirements. Parking Management Regulations Parking regulations are specified in Section 4.4.080 of the 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. Also standards for construction of parking garages will be reviewed to address minimization of land area and the amount of impervious surface. A,IRPORT The Airport Chapter of the Renton Transportation Plan is derhzed from, and based on, the 2002 Airport Business Plan and the updated Airport Master Plan for the Renton Municipal Airport. It should be noted ~Renton's airport is more than a transportation facility. It is also a vital element to Renton's commercial and industrial development and economy, through the providing aircraft services, manufacturing support, flight training and other airport activities.!. it pro'lides and the employment that these activities generate. The intent of the objectives and policies is to support increased aviation activities and appropriate ·mitigation of adverse impacts when possible. Objectives The Airport Chapter is based on the following objectives: T -Qf: Promote and develop local air transportation facilities iri a responsible and efficient manner and recognize, the Renton Municipal Airport as a unique, valuable and long-standing public transportation facility within the region. T -RQ: Maximize available space on the airport site for uses th~t require direct access to taxiways and runways such as storage and parking of aircraft and aircraft maintenance and service facilities. T -SR: Continue operation of the Airport as a Landing Rights Airport, ultimately providing permanent inspection facilities to the U. S. Customs Service. Policies The Renton Airport Master Plan and This Transportationthe Transportation Element of the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan contain the City policies concerning the Airport Chapter. The following policies were developed for this Transportationthe Transportation Element: 11-85 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 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 Development standardsRegulations, to create a range of appropriate allowable parking ratios. Additional revisions have been made to support HOV, transit, and non-motorized usage and access. Employers' Mode Split The State Commute Trip Reduction la'll is intended to achieve a reduction of 15% by 1995,20% by 1997, 25% by 1999, and 35% by 2005, in single occupant vehicles and/or average vehicle miles traveled for affected employers. The Washington State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Law requires employers deemed to be affected by the CTR Law to have transportation programs for their employees designed to meet goals for reduction of single occupancy vehicle commuter trips and/or reduction of vehicle miles traveled. CTR-affected employers shall have two (2) years to meet the first CTR goal of fifteen percent (15 %); four (4) years to meet the second goal of twenty percent (20%); six (6) years to meet the third goal of twenty-five percent (25%); and twelve (12) years to meet the fourth goal of thirty-five percent (35%) from the time they are deemed a CTR-affected worksite and begin their program. Employers' mode split will be addressed with data being gathered and used for the implementation of the CTR law. In order to implement the State Commute Trip Reduction law, King County was divided up into approximately a dozen CTR zones with similar employment density, population density, level of transit service, parking availability, and access to High Occupancy Vehicle facilities. The Puget Sound Regional Council produced base year values for 1992 for each zone using its regional transportation model. These values reflect the average rate of single occupant vehicle (SOV) trips for all employers in the zones. Most of the City of Renton is located in the South King County zone. A small piece of the City, the northernmost tip, north of May Creek, is located in the East King County zone. The base year value for single occupant vehicle trips for both the South and the East King County zone is 85 %. While this figure is not an exact mode split figure, it is representative of the degree to which employees of all employers in Renton are accessing their worksites by single occupant vehicle or using other modes. The assumption is made that the SOY rate is 85 %, and the rate of trips made by other modes is 15 %. TDM/CTR Programs The City adopted a CTR Ordinance and a CTR Plan (February 1993). The ordinance outlines the manner in which and the schedule with which employers located within the City of Renton are required to design and implement commute trip reduction programs at their worksites. -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 establishes the CTR zones mentioned above. It explains the circumstances and procedures for employer appeals of CTR 11-84 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTA & J.bN ELEMENT Revised ~/17/04 FIGURE 5-1 DOWNTOWN CORE EXISTING PARKING SUMMARY 2001 + I 27 I , obin Ave S 140 .+11 151 rn e «I 2nd 124 Cf.) +30 CLI > . 154 -< VI ..... '66\ 100 2 9 +8 ~ ~ 108 2 4 rn ·E 51 0 +21' ~ 72 . Downtown Core Existing Parking Summary 2001 2055 +387 e ----·----.... -.--2442 ::: ~ :!1l '. 78 ", ,-:.: " .. ," ."', .. 1 9 S 3rd Sl 36 +20 56 (j o~ 25 +27 52 ___ ~CaN ~ Off-Street Parking On-Street Parking --:...-..!'"--,,. Total Partdng Spaces '":...'"1i:=,,-=:":'-'::-- 11-83 I CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Policy T -4+51. 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. Also see related policies in the HOV section. Existing Parking Supply and Demand , ',-< " Strategy T -4+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. An inventory of the existing parking supply in the Central Subarea (for location see Figure 1 4 in the Arterial Chapter)Downtown Core was conducted in l'\ugust, 19932001. The inventory gathered data for both on-street and off-street spaces. +able-Figure 5.1 belew-summarizes the results of the inventory. +he , north industrial area has approximately 13,700 off street spaces and the Grady 'llay commercial area has 4,300 off street spaces, concentrating 68% of the off street parking at the north and south ends of the Central Subarea. The GIID-Downtown c~ore in comparison has -1-;002,055 off-street spaces, or 4 % of the, total. There are also ~387 public off-street parking spaces within the GBIlDowntown 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 Central SU9aFell TFansportation Plan, Existing Conditions draft report.Parking in Renton's Downtown Core report. Table S.l Central Subarea Parking Summary Spaces ~ Of(Street Total Number of Spaces Number of Handicap Spaces * On Street One Hour Restrictions Two Hour Restrictions Special Restrictions No Restrictions Total Number of Spaces Central Subarea Parking Silaces 26,522 ~ 202 -l,W9 ~ +,m ~ 29;070 JI!. This iHCludes 80 silaces at the Boeing plant which are assigned to employees 'Nith disabilities. Source: Central SU9al'OO Tronspol'tation Plan, Existing Conditions, draft, January 1994 &-% 4G-%- 2-%- W-%- -lOO-% Ongoing transportation planning work will include a city wideexpanding the parking study area, possibly citywide ... if needed for the refinement of parking policies and guidelines. 11-82 · "'-/' CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6I2JI.0408117/04 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT/ COMMUTE TRIP REDUCTION (TDMlCTR) 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, and the 1997 amendments, 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 of the 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: T-QN: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single occupancy vehicles. T-PO: 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 ..J943. 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 minimized mitigated through techniques, such as ' transportation management programs implemented through cooperative agreements at ' the work place, flexible work hours and subarea planning.) Policy T -4044. Appropriate parking ratios should be developed which take into account existing parking supply, land use intensity and transit and ride-sharing goals. Policy T -4145. Alternatives to on-street or on-' site parking should be explored. Policy T -4246. Criteria should be developed to locate park-and-ride lots serving residential areas. 11·81 Policy T -4J47. The construction of parking structures in downtown Renton should be encouraged. Policy T -4448. Parking ratios should be reduced as transit services are increased and an adequate level of public transit can be demonstrated. Policy T-4S49. Transportation demand management measures should be implemented at residential and retail developments, as well as at the workplace. Policy T-4650. Encourage The City should encourage employers Employers affected by Commute Trip Reduction laws should be encouraged to implement measures that support reductions in SOY travel and vehicle miles traveled. /' , /: CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FaciJity Name Sunset Bypass Route Monroe Avenue Northeast Duvall A venue Northeast Lake Washington Boulevard £ (Lk Washington Loop Route) Garden £ (Lk Washington Loop Route) Central Renton Connection (Lk Washington Loop Route) Burnett Airport (Lk Washington Loop Route) Hardie/Rainier Bypass Southwest 7111!! Southwest 16th ~ {Completed) Southeast Area Strander Boulevard/Southwest 27th Street Sunset Boulevard (West) Talbot Road Northeast 3rd/Northeast 4th Street TABLE 4.~1 PROPOSED BICYCLE ROUTES Route Northeast 17~treet (Duvall Avenue Northeast to Union Avenue Northeast) Union Avenue Northeast (Northeast 17thtll Street to Northeast 12th til Street) Northeast 12th th Street or NE 10th Street (Union Avenue Northeast to Edmonds Avenue Northeast) . lit II! Edmonds Avenue Northeast (Northeast 12~/1O~-Street to Northeast Park Drive) Northeast Park Drive (Edmonds Avenue Northeast to Lake Washington Boulevard North) Monroe Avenue Northeast (Northeast 4th tIl-Street to Northeast 12th tIl-Street) Duvall Avenue Northeast (Northeast IQIh~treet to Northeast 24th tIl-Street) Lake Washington Boulevard (Northeast 44th til-Street to Northeast Park I)rWeCoulon Park) (Partiallv ,r1completed) Houser Way North (Lake washin£ton Boulevard to North 8th tIl-Street) Garden Avenue North (North 6th -Street to Bronson Way) Garden A venue/N orth 6th Street to Airport Perimeter Road (Various routes under consideration). Burnett Avenue South (Cedar River Trail to Southwest 7th til-Street) Airport Perimeter Road corridor (Logan Avenue North to Rainier Avenue) Rainier Avenue North (Airport Perimeter Road -to Northwest 3rd rG-Street) Northwest 3rd fG-(Rainier Avenue North to Hardie Avenue Northwest) Hardie A venue (Northwest 3rd rG-Street to Southwest 7th ili-Street) Southwest 7th til-Street (Burnett to Oakesdale) Lind Avenue Southwest (Southwest 7th til-Street to Southwest 16th tIl-Street) Southwest 16th th-Street (Lind Avenue Southwest to Oakesdale RoadRaymond A venue Southwest) Main Avenue (Bronson Way to Benson Road South) Benson Road South (Main Avenue South to Southeast 168th tH-Street) Puget Drive Southeast (Benson Road South to Edmonds A venue Southeast) bake ¥ouags Waterliae tEdmoads Aveaue Southeast to +iffaay Park) Edmonds Avenue Southeast (Puget Drive Southeast to South 157th th-Street) Snringbrook Wetlands Trail to Interurban Trail Hardie Avenue Southwest to West City Limits South 7th Street to South City Limits Sunset Boulevard North to East Ciry Limits * Identified in the 6 Year (1995 2000) Transportation Improvement Programs. 11-80 J CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 TABLE 4.1 MASTER TRAIL PLA ... "f\T PROPOSED NON MOTORIZED FACILITIES 11-79 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 / The City of Renton Trails Alaster Plan provides an in depth description of proposed walking, bicyele, and mixed 1:lse trails. These proposed non motorized facilities are shown in Figllre 4 2 and listed in Table 4.-h The creation of a large n1:lmber of new pedestrian only trails and paths is recommended in the Trails Master Plan. Most of these trails are several miles long aad c01:lld consist of gril';el or other soft pil';ing s1:lrfaces. By namre, these types of trails are primarily used for recreational p1:lFposes, and are not necessarily supporti';e of transportation goals. The creation of these trails ''''01:lld certainly supplement the City'S transportation system, and their developmeBt by the Parks Department SHo1:lld be encouraged. Many of the planned bicyele facilities in the Trails Master Plan '",ould be ';aluable transportation system components. Routes that are found to be important transportation elements c01:lld be constructed thFough the transportation program. Along roadways designated as bicycle routes, roadway or shoulder vlideBing may accommodate cyelists' needs. These impro'lements could be added v;hen roadway improvement projects are constructed, or implemented as individual improvement projects. Table 4.2 lists routes that have been initially 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. Further review by the City of Renton, in cooperation with citizen groups, will be necessary to determine which of the projects listed in Table 4.2--.Lare sel~cted for development. King County is pursuing development of bicycle facilities outside of the Renton city limits. Four routes leading into Renton have been identified in the King County Non-motorized Plan: • 116l!! Ave~ue Southeast (Edmonds Avenue Southeast) (Southeast Petrovitsky Road to South 15T Street) . nd • 140 Place/Avenue Sq1ftheast (Southeast 192-Street to Southeast Renton-Maple Vall~l Road) • State Route 900 (138-Avenue Southeast (Du~all Avenue Northeast) to Southeast 82-Street) • Coal Creek Parkway Southeast (Southeast n--PlaceNewcastle City Limits to Renton City Limits) . The routes identified by the City of Renton and listed in Table 4.2--.Lwill 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. II-77 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Design criteria for walkways, trails, and bikeways ate contained in a variety of documents, including the City of Renton City 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 saJe 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 Unk 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 Walk .PregF8m Preliminary Engineering RepOltCitywide 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 of the potential annexation areas do not provide protected non-motorized inter-neighborhood connection. This is not the case in Fairwood, however, where sidewalks have been installed throughout the development. Another important consideration is the bicycle route connection to regional cycling corridors. The regional corridors to which the Renton trails-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 Walk PregramCitywide 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 sideslopes and roadway grades, or minimal expected pedestrian usage, some locations will have pedestrian/cyclist facilities constructed on only one side of the street. Installation of the Sidewalk facilities detailed in the City 9fRenton Comprehensi'-re Walk P-regF8m Preliminary Engineering Report will be constructed as part of tlre-~prioritized sidewalk installation program. Additional non-motorized facilities will be constructed in conjunction with roadway improvement projects and as part of the Transit Improvement Program. Current annexation area roadways without sidewalks will be added to the Comprehensive Walk .ProgF8mCitywide Walkway Study after annexation into the City. Sidewalk improvements on roadways could be improved through local improvement district (LID) and capital improvement projects (CIP). 11-76 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTh..l0N ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 4-1 EXISTING NON-MOTORIZED FACILITIES Existing Non-Motorized Facilities (2003) Legend C· U' I Ity nut ". I .... .... Renton Planning Area Transportation Plan 11-75 Not ToScak -Bicycle FocIII'es l. TaylorAve/Hardle Ave 2. laIce Avetrobin St 3. Lake Washingmn Loop 4. Southwest 16rh Street 5. Oakesdale Ave SW 6. Duvall AveNE 7. NE4th Street -Mixed Use facilities 10. udar Rivet/Urban Industrial Zone 11. Rainier Ave 12. Green River Trail 13. Interurban Trail 14. Garden Ave/N 8th St IS. Springbrook Trail IIiI!l!ID Pedestrian facilities 20. Udar River Trail . ,.' CITY OF RENTON TRANSPOlh ATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 , II-74 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 5. Pro'lide adequate separation between non motorized and motorized traffic to ensure safety. _ 6. Put major emphasis on establishing a "macro" system of trails '+'Illile identifying critical missing links in the existing functional system. 7. Address "micro" level trails and fill gaps is existing trail patterns where appropriate. 8. The adopted Trails Plan shall be coordinated with and be an integral component of the City's on going transportation planning activities. 9. :Appropriate mitigation measures will be taken to address impacts on the city's Q!llrecreatioB and transportation infrastructure. Contributions to the City's non motorized circulation system will help alleviate such impacts. Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities The City's existing (1994~ non-motorized transportation system is comprised primarily of roadside sidewalk. Pedestrians have the exclusive use of sidewalks within business districts and have shared use with cyclists in other areas of the 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 sidewalks. Streets needing sidewalks include both local and arterial roadways. The January, ~City of Renton Comprehensive Walk Program Preliminary Engineering ReponCitywide 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. Renton is located at the crossroads of a regional system of existing and proposed trails. Existing routes within the City include the Cedar River Trail System and a portion of the Lake Washington Loop Trail. Regional Systems '.'lith proposed access to the City include the Green Ri'/er Trail and the Interurban Trail. Figure 4 1 shows the existing (1994~ non motorized facilities within Renton and the nearby regional routes. Except within business districts, cyclists may use existing sidewalks, provided that they yield the right-of- way to pedestrians. As <J.f ±99420@3, Rent<J.n has a combined bic~cle/pedestrian facility along Garden Avenue North (North 6!!L Street to North S!!L Street) and North S!!L Street (Garden Avenue North to Houser Way), and striped bicycle lanes on Southwest 16thIR Street (Oakesdale Avenue Southwest to Longacres Drive), on Oakesdale Avenue Southwest (SW 16th Street to SW 27th Street) and--on Duvall Avenue NE (NE 4th Street to NE Sth 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 of the 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 (2003) non-motorized facilities within Renton and the nearby regional routes. II-73 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Policy T -J236. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic should be accommodated within all residential and employment areas of the City. Policy T -JJ37 . Pedestrian and bicycle movement across principal arterial intersections should be enhanced. Policy T -J43S. Obstructions and conflicts that restrict-with pedestrian movement should be minimized on sidewalks, paths and other pedestrian areas. Policy T-3S39. Convenient and safe pedestrian and bicycle access should be provided to and at the downtown Itransit ~eenter and all transit stops. Policy T ~O. Bicycle storage facilities and parking should be encouraged within development projects, in commercial areas and in parks. Policy T ..J141. Streets and pedestrian paths in residential neighborhoods should be arranged as an interconnecting network and should connect to other streets. Policy T-3842. Ensure that nNew pedestrian facilities are-should be compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and wm . toward upgrading existing facilities should be upgraded to improve accessibility. Policy T-42.1. Non-motorized transportation should be developed in tandem with motorized transportation systems, recognizing issues such as safety, user diversity, and experiential diversity. Policy T -42.2. Recognize the diversity of transportation modes and trip purposes of the following four groups: pedestrians, bicyclists, joggers and runners. Policy T -42.3. Foot/bicycle separation should be provided wherever possible; however, where conflict occurs, foot traffic should be given preference. . Policy T -42.4. Adequate separation between non-motorized and motorized traffic should be provided to ensure safety. Policy T-42.S. The adopted Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan shall be coordinated with and be an integral component of the City's on-going transportation planning activities. Policy T -42.6. 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. (Also see related policies in the Open Space Section of the Land Use Element.) The following transportation related policies were deri';ed from the City &jRenton Trails Alaster .. l2Jan: 1. Develop non motorized transportation in tandem with motorized transportation systems, recognizing issues such as safet)', user diversity, and e*periential di';ersity. 2. Provide for the trail needs of Renton residents; working population; and commuters, recognizing the dinrsity of needs of such groups as: adults, children, senior citizens, workers, recreational users, and the physically impaired. 3. Recognize the diYersity of transportation modes and trip purposes of the following four groups: pedestrians, bicyclists, joggers/runners, and equestrians. 4. Pro'iide foot/bicycle separation wherever possible; hm't'ever, where conflict occurs, foot traffic should be given preference. .II-72 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08117/04 NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION Non motorized facilities consist of trails (paved or unpaved), open spaces, and designated routes, vlhich are used by pedestrians and cyclists. The non-motorized component of this plan 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 off street elemeRts of the non motorized transportation system are specified by the City o/Renton Trsils Alaster Plan. The on-street elements are specified in the City of Renton Comprehensive ~/k Program .. Preliminary Engineering ReportCitywide 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 these-the objectives and policies that follow is to ·1 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. For example, aA 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: T -J!: Improve the non-motorized transportation system for both internal circulation and linkages to regional travel. T-IQ: Develop and maintain comprehensive trails systems which provide~ non-motorized access throughout I, the City, maximizes public access to open space areas, and provides increased recreational opportunities for the public. T4K: Integrate Renton's recreational and functional non-motorized transportation needs into a comprehensive trail-transportation system serving both local and regional users. (Source: City of Renton Trsils Master Plan) T-ML: Enhance and improve the non-motorized circulation system to, from, and within the City. (SO\lfce: City o/Renton Trails Alaster Plan) T -NM: Develop and designate appropriate pedestrian and bicycle commuter routes along existing minor arterial and collector arterial corridors. Policies The City of Renton Trails Master Plan and this chapter cORtain the City policies concerning non motorized transportation elements, briefly described belm\' , including all of the transportation related Trails Master Plan and Comprehensi'/e Plan policies. JI-71 .---- n ~ f ~ ~lli~ ~ i ~ !ll!~ ! I ~ I 1111 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"!~~ I J I ii i ~~I I[ ~ ! ~ l ~~ ~ I ~! D "l r' c ('~ I i ( l li III I !! . ~ ~~ ~" ~ ~ ~~'~~i i LI I il i i llll = r ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~I~~!! = b~ ~ .~~ ~I> ~ ~~ ~ II i il~l~ ~~ ~ I~ ~ I~~~J! ( HI Ii i II i I I I I I I , I Jiil!i. )., 1 1 I~ I~ . I'" IE' ~ .~ ~ 1* I ~ J I ~ I ~ · CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 As shown in Table 3.1 and Table 3.11, the number of persons traveling to/from Renton in HOVs in 2010 will be significantly higher than in 1990. Demand management and commute trip reduction measures, as well as arterial and freeway HOV improvements, will be needed to facilitate and encourage this forecasted increase in ridesharing. The 2010 Renton travel demand forecasts include 315,000 daily person trips made in HOVs (see Table 3.1),· . which represents a 54 % increase over the 1990 total of 205,000 daily trips in HOVs. Despite the major increase in the HUIIlber of trips made in HOVs, however, the percentage increase is only slightly higher than the increase in overall travel demand, and as a result, the HOV "mode split" i.e., the percentage of person trips made in HOVs does ROt increase. Citywide, the percentage of trips made by people driving alone ill an auto (i.e., % SOY) will decline from 63% in 1990 to 60% in 2010, due largely to the forecasted iHcrease in transit mode split. In 1990 and 2010, the HOV mode split is higher in the residential areas than in the employment areas; In the employment centers of the Central Subarea, Renton Valley, and Black River analysis districts, 30% 32% of the forecasted trips are in HOVs, while in the largely residential S.B. Renton, Skyway, and Kennydale/Higblands analysis districts, SOVs are 30 % 40%. (HOV mode split typically is lower in employment areas, where there are proportionally more commute trips in the traffic stream. This is because commute trips tend to have lower a"erage "ehicle occupancies i.e., more SOVs and fewer HOVs than other types of trips). Level of Service As discussed in the Arterial Chapter, the City of Renton has re"ised its LOS policy ttH!mphasize~ the movement of people, not just vehicles. This new-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. These new-LOS standards 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 2(W} 2022 travel times and distance. Achieving this goal will guide the planning and programming of the 2(W} elements of the 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. 11-68 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 It should be noted that several of the HOV treatments in the HOV Plan are planned for implementation beyond 2015. Preliminary analysis of 2010 HOV travel demand indicates that HOV facilities/treatment may not be needed by 2015 on portions of the following l:H'terial corridors: Sunset Boulevard Park Drive to east City limit (improvement # 11) N.E. 4th Street Monroe Avenue N.E. to east City limit (improvement #12); and, SR 515 or Benson Road Puget Drive to squth City limit (improvement #15). HOll/ever, these improvements are anticipated to be needed at various time frames beyond 2015 to support Renton's le'f'el of service standard. The improvements in the Renton HOV Plan.>. proposed by 2010, along with improvements in the Arterial Plan and Transit Plan, provide a multi-modal transportation plan that meets the 2Q.1G-2022 level of service standard for the projected travel demand from land use development envisioned by 2OW2022.-HQ¥ treatments on the King County corridors, if implemented by 2010, will support Renton's level of service standard. If implemented after 2010, these HOV impro:vements could help to maintain this level of service standard. 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 cmild help maintain Renton's 2022 level of service standard. 1-5/1-405 Interchange • Northbound 1-5 to Northbound 1-405 • Southbound 1-405 to Southbound 1-5 Northbound I 405 to Northbound I 5 • Southbound 1-5 to Northbound 1-405 1-405/SR 167 Interchange • Northbound SR 167 to Southbound 1-405 • Northbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 1-405 at Tukwila Commuter Rail Station I -405 at Rainier A venue construct direct connection ramp 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 of the 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. Ridesharing and Mode Split Forecasts of 2010 HOV trips and mode split were based on an HOV vehicle occupancy of 2 or more persons, which is currently permitted in the region. 11-67 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Additionally, the following corridors are being considered as potential locations for HOV facilities: Rainier Avenue South from I 405 to S. 2""-Street Grady Way from LinG A:Yenue S.W. to Main Avenue South Old Benson Road from Petrovitsky Road S.E. to Main k/eRUe South Shattuck Avenue South from South 71h Street to South 2""-Street Lind Avenue S.W. from S .W. Grady Way to S .W. 71h-Stroot Hardie AVEmue S. W. from S. W. 71h Street to Sunset Boulevard S. W. (SR 900) The Renton Arterial HOV Plan has been coordinated with the King County arterial HOV program. The county program identifies SR 169 (Maple Valley Highway), SR 515 (Talbot Road S./Benson Road), SR 900 (Sunset Boulevard), east and west of Renton city limits, Park Avenue N.lN.E, Carr Road/S.B. 176!b Street/Petrovitsky Road and N.E. 3"!i/N.E. 4!b Street as probable HOV corridors. Other HOV corridors that 'Hill iBfluence travel within and around Renton include Davall Avenue N.E., "Old" Benson Road and SR -Ih 181 (West Valley Highway/Interurban Ayenue). Regarding Du'/all Avenue N .E., 140-A:Yeaue S .E. and S.E. 192!!!! Street, Renton will coordinate with King County on the feasibility of HOV facilities on these arterial corridors. 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. 44th Street, N.E. Park Driye or N. 8th Street, at Lind Avenue S.W., in the vicinity of Benson Road or Talbot (SR 515), and on the SR-167 system at S.W. 27th 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/Burnetti Logan/N. 6th comprise the northern portion of the corridor and in the southern portion South Grady Way, Shatmck Ayenue S., Rainier Avenue, Lind Avenue, Hardie Avenue and Main Avenue South are'under consideration to complete the corridor. (Other potential north-south streets south of S. 4th Street, i.e. Shattuck Avenue S., Burnett Avenue, Williams Avenue and Wells Avenue are not under consideration as a result of the City's decision, in response to significant public input, to locate the southern portion of the transit corridor outside of the South Renton residential area.) 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 ~enter. The ~:nsi~fic~~id: iil~dp~O b\m:le::~~d b~I~OlO. Also, .the sh~ranl der Bouilievasrdov d _I Improvement I entl Ie m e rtena an, a e . _'_' WI serve transIt ve IC es as we as an HOV traffic and is planned for implementation coordinated with the Renton/Tukwila commuter rail station. Several of the above HOV Itransit improvements are being consideredhave 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 will eyaluate 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. In its preliminary e'/aluations, Sound Transit has identified the Central Renton north-south transit corridor improvements and HOV direct access interchange improvements at LinG Avenue, Benson Road, Park AYenue and N. North 8th Street as warranting further evaluationbeneficial capital investments. Extensive tech.-:lical and public processes will be undertaken before a final decision is made. II-66 ..... ~ !.II Figure 3·1 ® Map Index of HOV Improvements t Improvement Umits North to 1405 Add HOV Lanes 1. SR 167· SB HOY lane Extension Add HOV Ramps 2. 1405/SR-167 NB SR-167 to NB 1405 SB 140S to SB SR-167 3. SR-l67 SW 41st SB on-ramp SW 43rt! NB on-ramp New HOV Interchange 4. 1-405/North 8th S. SR 167/SW 27th St 6. 1405/NE 44th St . - half Interchange HOV by-pass lanes fulllnten:/:lange half Inten;hange fullinten:hange Arterial HOV Lanes or Intersection Queue Jump NocToSaale 7. SR 169 Sunset Blvd to l40th Way SE 8. Park Dr/Sunset Blvd Garden Ave to East city limit 9. Ralnier A~ Airpon Way SR 900 to Logan Ave N 10. SW 27th St SR 167 to Oahsda1e Ave SW 11. SR 515 1-40S to South city limit Transit Corridor Grady Way to Park Ave Renton HOV Plan (2002-2022) legend ~~Sif ......... e Freeway HOV lanes Anerial HOVTreatments --Transportation Plan ~ Z~ ~~ 00 Zc::: S~ <Vol ""O~ &:: Z. ~o i' ~ Q.O Ii ~o .... z ~~ > I ~ i CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 as HOY, allowing 2Two or more persons in a vehicle are allowed to travel in that-these lane§.. These lanes are in effect 24 hours per day, except when non-HOY 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. +he-This HOV facility is also designated for 2+ occupant vehicles. AAn HOV queue jump lane is provided at the following interchange ramps in Renton: the northbound SR- 167 to northbound 1-405 ramp; the 1-405/SR-169 (Maple Valley) northbound and southbound on-ramp§.; the 1-405/N.E. Park Drive northbound and southbound on-ramps; the 1-405/N.E. 30th northbound on-ramp; and, the 1-405/N .E. 44th southbound on-ramp. Each of the queue jump lanes has a 2+ designation. HOV Plan HOV lane improvementslanesfacilities on SR-167 and 1-405 (recently completed by the Washington State I;)Q+)-provide the freeway HOV system through Renton. HOV lanes are 1:Hlder construction on SR 167 between Kent and Auburn (SR 167 HOY lanes are completed between I 405 and Kent). Additional regional HOV facilities (Le., on 1-5) must be implemented by the State Department of Transportation in order to provide regional HOV service te-to the 1-405 and SR 167 corridor§..· To-date HOV lanes have been completed on 1-5 between the Seattle CBD and KellhPuyallup and on SR 167 between 15th 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,over the next 20 years -19%-(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 A venue / Airport Way • SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway) • Park Drive North / N.E. Sunset Boulevard N.B. 3rd Street / N.B. 4th-Street Sunset Boule'/ard Bronson Way to I 405 (completed) • SR-515 or Benson Road Carr Road / S.B. 176th Street / Petrovitsky Road • S. W. 27th Street The Renton HOY Plan also proposes HOV facilities on the following corridors in King County: SR 900 (east of Renton) -l4Oth Avenue S.B. S.E. 1921lil-Street 11-64 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 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: T -G~: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. T -KG: 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. ' T -III: Provide facilities to support attainment of Commute Trip Reduction and other Growth Management I, goals within the City. Policies Policy T -2630. The City should support completion of a comprehensive system of HOV improvements and programs on state highways and regional arterials which give high-occupancy vehicles a travel time advantage over single- occupancy vehicles should be supported. Policy T 4+31. Measures The City should continue to promote measures to increase the use of high occupancy vehicles should be promoted among employers located within the City. Policy T -:2832. A continuous network of arterial HOV facilities (lanes, bypass, etc.) should be provided on the congested travel corridors in Renton. Policy T -2933. Arterial HOV facilities should be provided on the local arterial routes in Renton that provide access to/from the regional highway system. Existing HOV Facilities Policy T -J034. The City should establish or should encourage the establishment of Arterial arterial HOV system warrants, standards and criteria should be established for usage (volume, capacity, LOS),-};J>hysical and geometric characteristics;., appropriate locations,~time-of day of operation,~HOV facility type,--etG. Policy T-M35. The City should support aA regional vehicle occupancy monitoring and HOV system evaluation program should be established. that includes elements such as a "demonstration managed lanes" project, electronic tolling or "HOT baoosLANES" concept. (Also see related policies in the TDMICTR Section and see King County Countywide Planning Policies, .Policy T 6 which hy this reference is incoFpemted in the HOVsectien.) The City currently has freewayFreeway HOV facilities are provided aloog--Qn Interstate 405 and SR-167. Freeway oa ramp queue jumps are also provided at the iaterchaage of I 405 aad SR 167 ami at four other I 405 imerchaages serviag Remoa. later state 405 hasThese include inside (median) HOV lanes, both northbound and southbound, on 1-405 from the 1-5 interchange and continuing to the HOrth-Rt!llton north city limit and beyond. These laaes are defiaed II-63 ---ll----+----------'--11---______ _ II H 1 H1H $l ~ ~~~~~I ! :: ; in! Jl ~ ; ;: ; l~ ~ i~! !1111 i~ 1 I ~~~~~ 11 ~' I i~ l """ .. I HIUI~. .. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPOR'l .... ON ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 2-3 RENTON TRANSIT PLAN NccToScalc Renton 2002-2022 Transit Plan -Conceptual Renton Planning Area .... _ ............ - Plan Regional Commuter Rail . III!!I High Cpaclty Transit &. Other Regional Transit Routes _____ • Park&. Ride B 11-60 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Level of Service The City of Renton has revised its LOS policy te-emphasize~ the movement of people, nOt just vehicles. This new-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-new LOS standards 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 SOY travel. Achieving this goal has guided the planning and programming of the ~lements of the Transit Plan, which are described in the Renton Transit Plan Support DooomeHt. 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 refmement and updating of the transit index. ' II-59 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 Regional transit services are will be 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 will link~ 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 will-belli 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, by 2010 (to provide a level of service standard that is COllCliFFtmt with funlre land lise projections), and beyond over the next 20 years to . support Renton's conceptual transit plan, are described in the Renton Transit Plan SliPPOrt DocumentCity of Renton Transit Needs Assessment as well as in the King County Transit Division's Six-Year Transit Development Plan for 199620012002-2007 (December 1995) and by the regional Sound Move program. This--The Transit Plan comprises a transit system that will serve Renton from O'ler ilie next 20 years (1995 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). Transit Usage and Mode Split The regional and local transit systems serving ilie Renton area in 2010 as modeled by Puget SOlind Regional COlincil (PSRC) wOlild proyide only pa£tial, incomplete service to Renton residential a£eas, employment centers, and commercial centers, and wOlild provide only minimal service for internal trips and trips between Renton and south King Comity, which wOlild comprise the vast majority of tripsto/fr.om Renton. The City of Renton's transit mode splits are based on Renton's planned 2010 land lise and aSSlime iliat Remon is seryed by cOfBIIlliter rail in 1997 and light rail by 2015. This transit mode split information was incorporated ill ilie Renton Transportation Model and lised in developing transit serviee and facility recommeooations . Forecasts of 2010 transit ridership on the local oos, regional blis, and cOllll1lllter rail seryices incorporated in the Renton Transit Plan are compiled in Table 2.1, 'i'/hich smnma£izes ilie total oomber of Renton trips that lise transit and the transit "mode split" (i.e., the percentage of Renton trips made on transit). lAAthOligh boili the total nmaber and ilie proportion of transit trips tra'/eling to/from Renton in 2010 under the planned land lise wOlild be significantly higher ilian in 1990, transit ridership vAll still comprise only a minor portion of overall travel. (See Table 2.1 and Table 2.11) Major local and regional transit service improyements improvements that directly sen'e Renton will be needed to significantly increase the rate of transit lise. With d1ese improyements in combination wiili HOV improvements, 30% to 35% of tlle total trips forecasted by 2010 cOlild lise transit or HOV facilities on a daily basis. Ongoing transportation plar.ning work will include continued refinement and Hpdating of the transit mode split as new information on regional and local transit plans develops. II-58 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTAa ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 FIGURE 2-2 REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEM Sound Move The Regional Transit System Plan II-57 r.lap Key o N .... Future Unk route .. station options <> HOY aaess ramp or Improwment CD P .... Rlde ® r ..... kCenter ® Fiyerstop OS_n • iIererred station Rcgiooat.'nansit 8y;tcm ", CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 additionally be served by local, and possibly regional, bus transit, including fast connections to the Downtown Renton Transit Center. II-56 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 1oc~ed:iH tI~nsofporatet\:kiBgCo~fflY; ';ls,:,,~t~~:'~~~~fl,l~ ':~~8.fan etmr~h '~:'14Oth'A'i8.Bt!e, SQ~$.~aW[~4~/? ~:;~ :S,plitli8.a~t 177tlI"Street~; 'UHs IOfR~~:~~ '~~~,e~Sffl~~'~,~:.~~':~8~'~~!lpliGi~~"".' 'i " ',:' ;~,',' ,', "",~~,,>':,:;':,:',:'<C{\;~.::?D :I~ a.d~i,ti~il;' a~: ~mploy'ee 'ollIy' p'a!=k .. ~~aJid~::Iqr,\i!.a.S'€j~I~te~.(~~afcli'.);g93tb)(~e~li(f~iBg¢bmP:4B~~~f;:.~~.rW] r~l~.~~~~=tt~1~~~~~~;~~\;:~~~~~iEj Future Regional Accessibility The long range transit and rideshare service concept for the King Cqunty Transit Division (Metro) service area is described in the Long Range Policy Frameworkfor Public Transportation (adopted October, 1993). This "Framework Plan" updates Metro's 1981 Comprehensive Plan. 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 Planfor 1996 20012002-2007.(Desember 1995). On May 31, 1996 the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit Authority (Sound Transit) approved a lO-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. Regional Sound Transit provides regional express bus service will behas been added by Sound TraRsit, with three routes servingwith three routes serving Renton. These-As noted previously,-twe express routes serve SeaTac, aOO-Bellevue, Auburn and Federal Way. Future routes will sonnest Renton 'Nith Bellevue, Tubvila, Sea Tac, Kent, AubufB, Puyallup, and Tacoma. To ensure quick access to the Downtown Renton Transit Center, the Sound Move plan identified direct access HOV ramps on 1-405 atin the vicinity of Park Drive N.E:-North Sib Street aHd in the vicinity of Grady Way, Benson Road South, and Talbot Road South. and needed arterial HOV improvements in Renton to improve transit speed, reliability and ridership· of transit services. Before constructing any HOV direct access and 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 1-405/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 comprised by the Transit Chapter of the Transportation Element indude the transit related transportation mitigation measures identified by the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element FiRat ElS. These mitigation measures are needed to provide adequate access between the regional transit system and Renton residential and employment areas, and to provide an attractive tr~nsit 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 will-behas been provided by a station located on the Renton-Tukwila border between ,'I Longacres Way and Strander Boulevard. This station is currently served by local bus transit and will . II-55 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08117/04 originate in the FaiPNood area of l:lBincorporated King Coonty sOt-ltJ:Ieast of the Renton city limits. Both of these ro1:ltes provide weekday express peak hour peak direction service oBly. One ro1:lte (109) provides 'Neekday peak hour peak direction transit service from downtown Seattle to the Renten Boeing plant. Another bus rome (108) provides service from Renton to the D1:IwamishiBoeing Indl:lstrial area of S01:lth Seattle. One ro1:lte (163) origiHates in Kent and serves Renton's Talbot Hill neighborhood and downto\vn Renton. Seven rootes operate between Renton and other points in SOt-ltJ:I King C01:lnty, the Eastside, North Seattle, and North King Col:lRty. One of the rootes (155) operates local sh1:lttle service between downtown Renton, Fairwood, and Sol:lthcenter Mall in neighboring Thkwila. King Cmmty Transit provides weekday service on a roote (167) origiHating in Aool:lfn and Kent, serving Renton and termiHating at the University of Washington in North Seattle. This ro1:lte operates peak h01:lrs in the peak direction of travel. ABOther b1:ls route (169) serving Renton and Sol:lth King C01:lnty operates seven days a week as a slmttle bet\veen the Sooth Renton Park and Ride lot and the Kent Park and Ride lot. This r01:lte is through rooted 'Nith aoother S01:lth King CoWlty line serving Highline COffiIBl:lnity College in Des Moines, thereby linking Renton and Des Moines directly. Two of the seven ro1:ltes (143, 912) provide peak h01:lr service between Renton and S01:lth and S01:ltheast King County (Maple Valley, Enl:lfficlaw). Bus service is provided seven days a '+'leek on a roote (240) that originates at Clyde Hill, serves Bellewe, Renten and Southcenter. An additional r01:lte (340) allows access from Renton to many locations thr01:lghoot the county on a seven day a week basis. This roote originates in Bmien, serves T1:Ikwila, Renton, the I 405 corridor from RentoR: throogh Newport Hills, Bellevue, Kirkland, and Bothell, as well as Kenmore, Lake Forest Park, Ballinger Terrace, and :Amora Village. There are t'NO remaining King C01:lnty Transit bl:ls rootes sef'/ing Renton. The first is a peak h01:lr rome (247) which origiHates in Redmond, serves the Overlake and Eastgate areas in Bellewe, 1:Ises the I 405 corridor to downtown Renton, and contiRHes on to the Green River Valley of Renton and Kent. The final r01:lte (280) provides regional late evening service (past 1 :00 am) on weekdays, CORRecting Renton, dov/ntoVlR Seattle and Bellewe. . C1:Istom D1:Is Serviee King County Transit as of 1995 operated two custom b1:ls r01:ltes serving Renton. These rootes operate one trip in the peak hour in the peak direction serving areas with significant employment deHSity. Renton custom bus service incl1:ldes romes i) originating at the Renton Boeing plant and serving the Boeing plant in Everett, ii) originating at the Kent Park and Ride lot, serving the Renton Boeing plant and terminating at the Everett . Boeing plant. [pa"R':":~Q~;J{l~~;:'F~~i,{iti:~~~i;:: '. II-54 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTAIN ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 2-1 EXISTING RENTON TRANSIT SERVICE AND FACILITIES ~ ... .;. ~,ExistIng Transit ServIce " , "(2003); c : Bus Routes D Cityl;Jmlts ~ DART Service Area Urban Growth Boundary = II-53 '--_F_a~_ ==::':."e._ --,--__ a __ _ __ a~ _~a __ .--_a_ --,--__ aF_ .--___ a __ .--__ KIn _.---._--_,,","--__ I.WwnoIIrCIoOId lit ___ KIn 210 ___ -. 280 ____ a_ 34:1 ___ _ 1160 ___ '_ I11III ______ Kln __ IlOl ____ HIQNIIIIo IlOe ____ HIQNIIIIo IIa2 __ -CBa*Gla_CBa*Gl Sounder Commuter Rail Station Sounder Commuter Rail CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 'The Downtown Renton Transit Center will be is the hub of transit service in Renton. The Transit Center will be-kserved by regional and local service provided by Sound Transit and the King County Transit Division (Metro), and will actacts as both a destination and a major transfer center. The Downtown Renton Transit Center will be is a "T" shaped facility located between South Second and South Third Streets on Burnett A venue South and on a new connection between Logan A venue South and Burnett A venue South. The facility will be has been carefully integrated with other planned developments in the downtown area. Custom Bus· Service King County Transit as of 2003 operated one custom bus route (952) serving Renton. This route operates one trip 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. as of June 2000. is used at capacity. There are four interim 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 EdmondsAvenue 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 A venue Southeast. east of the Renton City limits in unincorporated King 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 an employee-only park-and-ride lot located in the vicinity of North 8th Street and Garden A venue North. This lot has a capacity of approximately 100 stalls. The City is proposing that has leased 200 parking spaces in the downtown parking garage be leased for to King County Metro Transit as an interima park and ride facility. Fixed Route Service The City of Renton as of 1995 was served by 21 different King County Transit bus rOl:ltes (see Figure 2 1). Seven of the rOl:ltes provide service from Renton neighborhoods into dO\'/ntown Seattle. Two of the rOl:ltes (106, 107) provide local seryice during weekdays, evenings, and weekends to Kell1lJ'dale, the Highlands and downtown Renton. Three of the seven rOl:ltes (111,114, 147), which pro'/ide express service between Renton and downtown Seattle, operate only dl:lring the weekdays. These routes serve unincorporated King Coonty, east of the Renton city limits, the Renton Highlands and downtown Renton. The remaining Pt'lO rOl:ltes (145, 148) II-52 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 Figure 2-1 identifies the bus routes operating in Renton in 2003. 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 a€€eSSstops 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 2003 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 significantly in the early evening periods; however, Route 240 provides evening and weekend service in the Highlands. In addition, Route 110, 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. For districts within Renton, connections from the Highlands area are important given current . demand patterns. These connections include Bellevue (non-downtown) and Factoria. Direct service is currently provided between Highlands and Factoria via Metro Route 240. Route 140 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. While several Metro and Sound Transit routes connect Kent with Renton, the service is focused on the downtown Renton. The Green River Valley area is accessed at the western edge of this district. 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. The following routes serve a variety of markets: '. • Routes 101 and 106, Downtown • Route 240, Bellevue • Route 140, Burien • Route 169, Kent • Route 148, Local Renton Downtown Renton Transit Center II-51 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 • Park and rides shol:lld l:lUse structured parking garages. • Parking stalls within the park and ride shOl:lld bBe available for non-commuter use during evenings and weekends. • Park and rides shol:lld bBe 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 -27. Surface ppark-and-rides located outside of the City's Urban Center should meet the following criteria: • Park and rides shOl:lld bBe located in the vicinity ofI-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.) • Park and rides should bBe located in Commercial or Industrial designations within easy walking distance of employment, and/or multi-family uses. • Park and rides shOl:lld nNot be located within the Rainier A venue corridor north of the I-405/SR-167 interchange. • Park and ride lots consisting of only sl:lrface parking shol:lld be a maximmn of six (6) acres to aA void consuming large areas of urban land for primary use parking lots. Policy T-28. Leased Shared-use park-and-rides located anywhere within the City should meet the following criteria: • Park and ride spaces shol:lld bBe leased from existing, under-utilized parking spaces required per development standards for a primary use. • Parking lots shOl:lld nNot be expanded to accommodate leased park and rides. • Park and rides shol:lld nNot be leased within the commercial area west of the Urban Center-Downtown bounded by SW 7th 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 -2&129. 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/Community Design Section; and, Downtown 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 which can support public transportation. Specific treatment of the routes and stops for a transit system in downtown Renton wOl:lld beare addressed in the Downtown Planpolicies of the land use plan. However, it is expected that such stops would serve commercial activity centers, which would compliment the commercial and residential activities envisioned in the Centers and Residential policies of the land use plan. Parking for the future transit system is encouraged ol:ltside of the downtown to discol:lrage increased traffic congestion. Criteria shOl:lld be de ... eloped to gl:lide establishment of park and ride lots serYing residential areas and to intercept throl:lgh traffic. Parking to sen'e the downtown stops of a transit system is to be held to a miniml:lm, to conser ... e land resources and millirnize congestion. 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. II-50 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Included in Table 1.4-Lare arterial and freeway improvements that have been identified for the intervening years between 2010 and 2015 and beyond ~2022. These improvements will also be needed to support future land use and neighborhood and business goals and improve safety. The 2010 to 2015 arterial impro¥ements and the 2010 impro¥emems comprise the 20 Year Renton Arterial Plan. Ongoing transportation planning work will include periodic testin&..Q.fthe amended list 0(20 year (1995 ·1 ~2002-2022t arterial and freeway improvements in Table 1.41, including those noted as completed, against the LOS standard. 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: T -)!G: Encourage the development and use of alternatives to single-occupancy vehicles. T -CD: Ensure that a regional high-capacity transit system serves Renton. T -DE: 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. T-.EF: Develop a local transit system that provides attractive, convenient service for intra-Renton travel. Policies Policy T -17. The City should work with other jurisdictions in the greater metropolitan area toward to plan and providing provide frequent, coordinated and comprehensive bus service and transit facilities in all residential and employment areas. Policy T -18. Local and regional transit service and facilities should be planned and improved in . cooperation with the regional transit authority. Policy T-19. The City should take an active role: in working with the regional transit agency agencies in planning and locating public transit facilities. Policy T-20. A-The multi-modal transit Transit centef-Center in downtown Renton should be promoted as part of a regional high capacity transit system. 11-49 Policy T -21. Parking areas serving the downtown transit Transit center Center should be encouraged in parking structures. Policy T-22. Non-structured ~-and-ride facilities should be primarily located out of the downtown Urban Center and feed into the downtown transit Transit ceaterCenter. Policy T -23. Development of a regional network using new technology to move people and goods should be supported. PolicyT-24. Assme The City should support development of transit service connecting Renton to a regional rail network. Policy T-25. Criteria should be developed to locate park-and-ride lots serving residential areas. Policy T -26. Park-and-rides within the City of Renton's Urban Center and its Center Village designations should meet the following criteria: I CITY OF RENTON TRANSPOR1. ..ON ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 14-±I RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN IMPROVEMENTS Arterial Plan Improvements Legend City limit 1~~"Yf;:;'i Renton Planning Area By 2022 ----Transportation Plan 11-48 ® i NotToSc:alc CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised M.2JI0408/17/04 ;~6:/ '1;/..;., l·} '. " "'. =::·~~~~.lI'~i~~;j~{~{f~tJ;'~: $t~~I_iIIlf~~iij Straaeer ~a\l~e,~are ' SR.'t8l}~ 9;~e~~¥.*~~:1~~·.,~~~Vt.~~t':, :,~l~~t~~,~e(:f;:>:'; withRemail} . »:\' ',:';;::" :\~:',;::';;.: . ''C,';: ~:~;~,t;:;:i»:'!;:;; . ." d! 11-47 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6I2Jf()408/17/04 • Southbound Houser Way to Southbound 1-405 • Northbound SR 169 to Northbound 1-405 WSDOT (City ROW): Rainier A venue -Grady Way to East Valley Road East Valley Road -SW 16th to SW 34th Street :~;';, :~. '.M7 ;~( ;~:. : ~. ~ .. 11-46 construct direct connection ramp construct direct connection ramp realign roadway to connect to East Valley Road at SW 16th Street arterial widening CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 59. Talbot Road -South Renton Village Place to South 15th Place 60. Mill A venue South -Houser Way to Bronson Way QL. Renton and Cedar Avenue Overpasses of 1-405 62. Sunset Boulevard -west of 1-405 63. Houser Way -north of North 4th Street 64. Lake Washington Boulevard -north of NE 44th Street 65. Benson Road/I-405 Overpass POST 2022 IMPROVEMENTS RENTON: South Lake Washington Improvements • Logan Avenue North -North 4th Street to Garden Avenue North • North 10th Street -Logan Avenue North to Houser Way • North 8th Street -Logan Avenue North to Garden Avenue North • Park A venue North Extension Logan A venue North to 1,200 feet north of Logan A venue North • North 10th Street / 1-405 o Northbound NE 10th Street to Northbound 1-405 o Southbound 1-405 to Southhound North 10th Street North 4th Street -Logan Avenue North to Sunset Boulevard WSDOT (Limited Access): 1-405 -1-5 to SR 167 1-405/SR 167 Interchange • Northbound SR 167 to Southbound 1-405 East Valley Road at SW 34th Street 1-405 at North 10th Street 1-405 at SR 169 • Northbound 1-405 to Houser Way 11-45 arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and 1-405 ramps convert to one-way northbound consolidate to one new overpass realignment/revisions to accommodate 1-405 widening realignment/revisions to accommodate 1-405 widening rRealignment to accommodate 1-405 widening replacement to accommodate 1-405 widening arterial widening new street/widen existing street arterial widening extend new street direct connection ramp direct connection ' ramp revise street network add one lane in each I direction construct direct connection ramp . construct new ramps : connecting to SR 167 construct direct connection ramps to and from the north construct direct connection ramp' CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/l7/04 . 44. 140m Avenue SE I SE Petrovitsky 45. Trans-Valley Corridor -Southcenter Parkway to SR 515 46. Benson Road I South 31"t Street WSDOT (Limited Access): 47 .. 1-405 -1-5 to SR 167 48. 1-405 -SR 167 to North City Limits 49. SR 167 -1-405 to SW 43rd Street 5Q. 1-405/SR 167 Interchange • Southbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 • Northbound SR 167 to Northbound 1-405 • Northbound 1-405 to Southbound SR 167 n.,. 1-405 between Lind A venue SW and Talbot Road . 52. 1-405/SR 169 Interchange • SR 169/North 3rd Street • Southbound 1-405 to Eastbound SR 169 53. 1-405/Park Avenue N Interchange 54. 1-405/NE 30th Street Interchange . 55.· 1-4051NE 44th Street Interchange WSDOT (City ROW) 56. SW 43rd Street -Lind Avenue SW to Talbot Road 57. East Valley Road -SW 16th to SW 34th Street 58. Lind Avenue SW -Grady Way to SW 16th Street 11-44 intersection improvements transportation improvements 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 coilstruct 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 accoJ.IUilodate 1-405 widening reconstruct to accommodate 1-405 widening and future improvements arterial widening arterial 'i'liaening and realignment arterial widening to accommodate frontage road and 1-405 ramps CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mI0408117/04 23. North 419 Street Logan l\venlle to SllBSet BOllle'/ardNE 4th Street/Hoquiam A venue NE; Mill A'/enlle SOllth/Carr Road; Grady Way/Williams A'/eooe Sooth 24. NE-t-Q19 Street Union AYeooe N.B. to Dllyall Ayen\le N.B.Maple Valley Highway (SR 169) -1-405 to East City Limits' OTHER JURISDICTION PLANNED IMPROVEMENTS TuKWILA: '~25. Sollth 180111 Street SR 181 to Oakesdale Aveooe SouthwestWest Valley Highway (SR 181)/South 156lh Street 26. Strander BOlllevard SR 181 to Oakesdale Avenue SO\lthwest (Also iB€lllded with Renton)West Valley Highway (SR 181) -1-405 to Strander Blvd. 27. Nelsen Place -South 156lh to South 158lh KENT: ~268. Lind Avenue Soothwest SOllthwest 43£6 Street to Bast Valley Road84lh Avenue , South -SR 167 to South 212th 29. 80lh Avenue South -South 1961h to South 188lh NEWCASTLE: , ~30. Coal Creek Parkway-Phase 2 and 3 -SO\ltheast 6919SE 84th Way to Renton City Limits (Moved from King COllnty)SE 95th Street ~31. Southeast 68l11f94l11-StreetNewcastle Way -112th Avenue Southeast SE to 129lh A venue Southeast SE 32. Newcastle Way /116lh Avenue SE 33. 112lh Avenue SE -SE 64th Street to Newcastle Way 34. 116lh Avenue SE -Newcastle Way to SE 88th Street 35. 112th Place SE -West City Lmit to 116lh Avenue SE 37. ~ ~ MJ038. ~39. 333240. ~1. ~2. ~3. KING COUNTY: Duvall A venue NE/Coal Creek Parkway -Renton City Limits to Newcastle City Limits (SE 95lh Way) South 192nd Street -SR-515 to 140lh Avenue Southeast SO\lth 192"" Street SR 515 to 140111 Aveooe Southeast South 192"" Street/South 200111 Street Bast Valley Road/SR 167 to SR 515 116lh Avenue Southeast -Renton City Limits to South 192nd Street 140th Way Avenue Southeast -SR-l69 to Southeast 192nd Street Coal Creek Parkway Southeast 72"" Street to Renton City Limits (Moved to Nev/castle) :' Elliott Bridge -Jones Road to SR-169 (Added) East Corridor Study -SR-l69 to Northea~t Fourth Street Carr Road / SE 176lh / SE Petrovitsky -Lind Ave. S.W. to 116lh Avenue S.E. Carr Road I Benson Road (SR-515) Intersection Impro'/ements I1-43 revise street networksafetyintersec tion improvements arterial safety/mobility improvements railroad grade separationintersection improvements new arterialarterial improvements street improvements new arterialpavernent rehabilitation arterial widening arterial widening arterial widening intersection improvements I arterial widening arterial improvements arterial improvements arterial widening arterial widening , new arterial widening new arterial arterial widening , arterial widening arterial widening bridge replacement arterial widening' arterial improvements graGe separationintersection improvements CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORT A TION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 TABLE 1.1 RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN 2002 -2022 IMPROVEMENTS L Bronson Way _South 2nd Street to SllIlSet BoulevardPark Avenue North 2. South 2"" Street Rainier l"'.venue to Main Ayenue South, Phase ISouth Lake Washington Roadway Improvments • Logan Ave N -North 6th to Garaden Avenue N • Park Avenue N -North 6th to Logan Avenue N • North 10th Street -Park Avenue N to Garden Avenue N • North 8th Street -Logan A venue N to Park A venue N J..,. CBD Streetscape 4. Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, Phase lB Southwest 19t1i to Soutlrllest 2+tliRainier Avenue -South 4th Place to South 7th Street 5. Seuth-Grady Way -Rainier Main Avenue to Talbot Road South (SR 515)West City Limits ~ Lind Avenue Southwest -Southwest 16th to Southwest 43rd Street 7. NE 2ndl and NE 6th Street,et-al-Duvall Avenue NE to ~Ih Avenue SE 156th Avenue SE 8. Duvall Avenue Northeast -Sunset Boulevard to Renton East City Limits 9. Oakesdale Avenue Southwest -Monster Road to SR-900 ~ S.W. 27th Street I Strander Boulevard -SR-181 to Oakesdale Avenue Southwest (Also included with Tukwila) .l.L. Grady Way / Rainier Pi't'enueSunset Boulevard/Duvall Avenue NE lb South 2"" Street Rainier Avenue to Main Avenue South, Phase 2Rainier Avenue South 2""-Grady Way to Renton North City Limits ll:. Puget Drive Southeast -Jones Place Southeast to Edmonds A venue Southeast 14. Benson Road -South 26th Street to South 31st Street li,. Talbot Road Southwest 43rd rd to Renton South City Limits ~ N .E. 3rd I N .E. 4th Corridor Improvements -Sunset Boulevard to Renton East City Limits 1L. Mill A venue South/Carr Road ilL. Lake Washington Boulevard. -Park Avenue North to Coulon Park Entrance ~ Park Ave. N. / Sunset Boulevard -Garden Avenue N. to Duvall Avenue N.E .. 20. S.W. 7th Street / Lind Avenue S.W. ll.:. South Renton Neighborhood Improvements . 22. N.E. 8th and NE 10th Street -Union Avenue N.E. to Duvall Avenue N.E. II-42 arterial wideningimprovement s/bridge rehabilitation safety improvements new 3-lane arterial arterial widening new 2-lane street new 2-lane street street improvements arterial widening/RR overcrossing replacement arterial improvements arterial widening new arterials arterial widening arterial widening new arterial grade separationintersection improvements ~arterial improvements arterial widening safety improvements/ arterial widening arterial widening existing/new arterial improvements intersection improvements arterial improvements safety/mobility improvements safety improvements street improvements streetarterial improvements CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTA'llON ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 FIGURE l-W§ RENTON ARTERIAL PLAN Renton Arterial Plan (2002 to 2022) Legend City limit ":~;l(1/) Renton Planning Area Principal Artetial _ MinOT Arterial Collector Arterial - Transportation Plan 11-41 Not To ScoIe CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORT A TION ELEMENT Revised 6f2JI0408/17/04 Arterial Plan is shown in Figure I-WQ. The improvements included in the Arterial Plan are listed in Table 1.4-l.and their location shown in Figure 1-l-l1. The Arterial Plan (Figure 1--lOQ) 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 1.4-l.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 W-W-improvements listed on Table l.4-l.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 2GW 2022 level of service standard and will be concurrent with land use development envisioned by 2GW2022. 11-40 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6I2J.ffl408/17/04 *Other factors are considered for calculating the transit LOS index including frequency of service and access time. Development can be allowed under GMA cOllCurrency requirements as HO\' and transit improvements are effective in maintaining the LOS standard whereas SO'! improvements '.",ill do little to improve SO\' travel distance. Additional information describing establishment of the 1990 LOS index and 2010 LOS standard is provided in the City of Renton Level of Service Documentation. Ongoing transportation planning work will illClude continued refinement and updating of the LOS standardAdditional information describing the methodology for determining Renton's LOS standard is provided in the City of Renton Level of Service Documentation, September 1995. This document will be updated to reflect the determiHatioH of the 20m LOS index and 2m2 LOS standard, and to reflect new information on ~regional and local transportation plans and level of service, particularly the CongestioH Relief Policy currently being considered for adoption by the WaShington TransportatioH CommissionPolicies and LOS StaHdards for state owned facilities. This work will also include testiHg the improvements proposed in the Arterial, Transit and HO'! Plans against . Renton's updated LOS staHdard. LOS standards for Highways of Statewide Significance (HSS) (Le. '1-5, 1-405, SR 167) have been adopted in 1998 by the Washington State Department of Tranportation (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 facilities 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 impedence 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 SOY improvements in the City of Renton over the next 20 yearsfrom f!9%-2002to WM2022j. (As discussed later iH the FiHaHciHg and ImplementatioH Chapter, a 20 year, 1995 to 2015, finaHciHg plaH has beeH assumed to ftmd traHsportatioH Heeds.) 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 IJ-39 I' CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 1+816.6 miles 12-1-18.7 miles * Rounded 1-w-6.8 miles 14942* 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 (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 SOY 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: 1) 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); 2) limited implementation of Sound Transit's planned express bus service and HOV direct access projects; and, 3) higher growth rate of backgroundvehicular traffic than anticipated for the period of 1990 20w02. The -1-990-2002 LOS index is the basis for the w.w-2022 standard. The average SOY 30-minute travel distance is forecast to decrease by 2GW2022. SOY improvements alone will not maintain the -1-990-2002 LOS standard in 2GW2022. A combination of HOV and/or transit improvements will need to be implemented to raise the HOV and/or transit equivalents to maintain the 2OW22 LOS standard. With the +9W-2002 LOS index as a base, the City-wide w.w-2022 LOS standard was-has been determined as follows: w.w-2022 Average PM peak travel distance in 30-minutes from the City in all directions SOY HOV 2 times Transit LOS (includes access time) Standard 1415* miles U17* miles 14 10* miles 4942 * Rounded This standard will require that the travel time of SOY (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 w.w-2022 demands for traffic growth/land use development. To test against the LOS standard, the 2022 planned Arterial, HOV, 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 include the 2022 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. . II-38 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 The new-Renton LOS standards ha¥e-has been refined to provide a system for use in evaluating transportation plans. This process included 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, HOV travel times; • Determination of future SOY and HOV travel time§. contOlH'S 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 ~twenty-year LOS standards using the existing most recent travel time ------index as the standard; • Testing transportation plans using LOS policy ,and future...stahdards to gauge the performance of the local transportation system, including State-owned facilities; • Selecting a plan that meets-maintains the established LOS standards. Other elements of the LOS implementation process include: • Defining procedures for plan:1ing and regulatory applications; • Monitoring the area to re-validate transportation plans; • Adjusting transportation plans as needed to meet standards and/or address other environmental/coordination issues; • Providing flexibility to modify the LOS standards over time (if needed). The latter elements of LOS implementation will be further refined, as part of ongoing transportation planning work. Level Of Service (LOS) Standard A-Citywide WH}-2022 level of service standards ha¥e--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. Establishing LOS standards for 2010 was necessitated because the only forecast data available from the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) was for this particular year. , ' The follO't'ling demonstrates how the new LOS policy was llsed to arrive at a 2010 LOS standard. I I A +9W-2002 LOS travel time index was--has been determined for the City by establishing the sum of the I average 30-minute travel distance for SOV, HOV and Transit as follows: +9W-2002 Average PM peak travel distance in 30-minutes from ,the City in all directions SOY HOV 2 times Transit LOS (includes access time) Index II-37 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 19 1990 PM PEAK HOUR INTERSECTION ENTERING VOLUME PER APPROACH LANE (use Renton Gemp Plan LV Element !2BYi EIS Figure 23) II-36 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 will-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. IJ-35 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 ~LOSPolicy Cllrreatly the national approach for definingNumerous jurisdictions define LOS \lSeS-using the traditional Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, +9941997). 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, 0, 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 0, 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. In the pastPrior 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 .. 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-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. The RewRenton'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 new LOS policy is designed to achieve several objectives: • Allow reasonable development to occur; • Encourage a regionally~linked, locally-oriented, dynamic transportation system; • Meet--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. The-The City of Renton LOS standards will belli used to evaluate Renton citywide transportation plans. The auto, HOV and transit measllreselements of the LOS standard will--beare based on travel times and distance and will beare the primary indicators for concurrency. The non-motorized and TOM measures IJ-34 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 Forecasted 2010 daily traffic volume per travel lane also was computed for Renton arterials. In 2010, most arterial corridors in Renton were forecasted to be carrying more than 5,000 vehicles per day per travel lane ('<'pdpl). In addition, the forecasted '/olumes on the 'following arterial corridors exceeded 8,500 ¥pdpl (by contrast, iR 1990 only tVIO short arterial segments had '/olumes greater than 8,500 ¥pdpl): Rainier Avenue • Grady Wayjeast of Lind) III Maple Valley High ... ;ay • Northeast 3-Street Northeast 4-Street Airport Way • South 200 Street Bronson Way DU'/all Avenue (north of Sunset Boulevard) • 108!!! Avenue (south of Petrovitsky) III f<I Northeast Sunset Boulevard • South 180-Street South 43-Street South III Renton Avenue Extension Carr Road South 176--,Street Intersection Service Levels In order to evaluate traffic operations and capacity deficiencies at intersections, the p.m. peak hour entering volume per approach lane (vpllpl) was computed for each intersection on the Renton arterial system. Although these computations are not based on the detailed lane configuration, traffic signal timing, and turn/thi'ough volumes used to determine intersection le'/el of service, the more general entering volume per approach lane information can be used to determine where intersection congestion is likely to occur and to compare conditions on various parts of the arterial system. Congestion problems typically can begin to occur when entering volume reaches 500 vpllpl. Intersections '.vith entering volumes of 600 700 vpllpl are likely to experience congestion, and where entering volumes exceed 700 vphpl, capacity is likely to be exceeded and congestion can be severe. In 1990, there were 14 Renton intersections with entering volumes over 500 vphpl (see Figure 1 9). Of these, six were 600 700 vphpl, and three were o'It')r 700 '/phpl. Five of the intersections with high peak hour entering volumes were on Rainier Avenue, including South 3f!! Street/Southwest Sunset Boulevard , III III • (705 vphpl), Grady 'Nay (620 vphpl), and South T Street, So~th 4-Place, and AIrport Way. Two of the intersections were on Main Street (Grady/Benson and South 3-Street/Houser), and two '.v ere at the SR 167/Southwest 43f!! Street interchange, including the intersection '+'lith the highest entering volume per lane in Renton (Southwest 43f!!/northbound SR 167 ramps: 750 vphpl). Other intersections with high 1990 p.m. f<I . peak hour per lane entering volumes include North r~Sunset (715), Airport/Logan (675), Sunset/Bronson} SR 169 (615), and Renton Village/Talbot and South T /Shattuck }\:'fenue South (610 each). 2010 forecasted peak hour enteriRg '<'olumes per approach lane exceeded 500 vphpl at 58 of the 130 Renton intersections analyzed. Of these, 19 intersections exceeded 700 vphpl and eight exceeded 900 vphpl. In the sphere of influence, forecasted entering volumes exceeded 500 vphpl at another 20 intersections, including 12 over 700 '/phpl and two oyer 900. Ongoing transportation planning '+'lork will include updating forecasted roadway capacity on arterials and at arterial intersections as nevI information on regional and local transportation plans become available. Traditional Level of Serviee (LOS) There is growing recognition (i. e. City of Renton and King County policies) that the traditional LOS approach is not consistent with federal (TEA 21) and State (GMA and CTR) legislation which encourage multi modal transportation solutions. The GMA encourages innovative approaches to level of service. 11-33 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6J.2Jf0408/17/04 FIGURE 1 8 1990 AVE~\GE DAJLY TRAFFIC VOLUME PER LANE (use Renton Comp Plan L U Element !2:rr!!1 EIS Figure 22) 11-32 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 The highest forecasted 2010 peak hmn intersection volwne was jllst llnder 8,000 entering vehicles at both the North 3f:!! / Sllnset "Bollievard North and the Sooth Grady Way I Rainier Avenlle Sooth intersections. The high voillme intersections (peak entering '/olmne over 5,000) in 2010 are listed below: ffi ffi North r Street,' Sllnset "Bollievard North (7,960) SOllth 43-Street,' Northbollnd SR 167 (5,900) Sollth Grady Way f Rainier Aveoo€ Sooth (7,960) Rainier Avena€! Sollth I Sooth 71ft Street (5,780) ffi tsJSllIl:H~lBlSfeletH"B~OB\ll:H<le~l,fa'alBrd;lf/-:I"B'SIr=eoflins5€omnr1"'NI-a'a)wr/c..,:S!HR~I9'69!:1-h(71o,O\:li5,*O:lt)---iSS-:.-¥\\'h'.-I.4~3-Street I East Valley Road (5,620) ffi ffi Talbot Road South I SOllth 43-~S~trFt:e~et~(t-e6f;",4+;3K:10Jt-) -----<S-S-:-1."'Nl-:-. ~43-Street I West Valley My,vy. (5,460) Interurban (West Valley Hwy.)1 Rainier A'lenlle South I Airport Wayl S.W. Gradjr Way (6,220) Renton Avenue Extension (6,250) II> !S"B@lenf*s;eon-n-i<RH:o~adfl--<!lS.{}olllllth:n-+/~S>€01ll1lHthHCbiaaIr'f-r-i<R<{l0ffl<adEl--fl(6r.,-t.23~0:H)-----:It>N<~00lr!'llthtl-44-Street I Park Avenlle N. (5,380) Talbot Road South / SOllth Grady Way (5,960) 1401ft A'lenue S.E.lPetrovitsky Road SE (5,130) II> II> Benson Road Sooth (SR 515) I S.E. 208-(6,050) N.E. 4-Street l Monroe AV€!nlle N.E. (5,070) II> ~SRK-+16ffi9H/'-It>"IHlo*rtER.h:B4bo=Hluffi<ndH-i-I 'H40B5>-+(::J-:5 ,442z!;\:0ft-) -------±"'I14H:10-Place S. E. I SR 169 (5,920) "Benson Road South (SR 515) I S.E. 192!!!! (5,000) . TFaffie Operations Arterial Service Levels In order to evaluate traffic operations and congestion on the Renton arterial system, the daily traffic volmne per travel lane was computed for each arterial segment .. This information, which compares traffic volume to roadway capacity, ',lIas used to identify the arterial segments on which traffic is congested. 1990 and 2010 daily traffic volume per tra'lellane 'Nere compiled for arterial segments carrying more than 5,000 vehicles per day per travel lane ("pdpl). Evaluation of the daily traffic per l<me data was gaided by two basic characteristics of llrban arterials: 1) a typical urban arterial can carry 700 800 vehicles per hour per lane (vphpl) and maintain uncongested traffic operating conditions, and 2) a typical peak hour traffic volume on an urban arterial will be abollt 9 % of the daily volume. Combining these two traffic characteristics yields an indicator of the level of congestion in terms of daily traffic per lane with an upper range of 7,000 8,500 vpdpl. In 1990, a numaer of arterial segments in Renton carried traffic volumes in the 7,0008,500 ¥pdpl raage (see Figare 1 8): Maple Vallt;]' Highway . Northeast 3-Street (immediately east of I 405) Houser Way Sunset "Boulevard North (immediately north of "Bronson) Talbot Road South (south of SOllth Grady Way) "Benson Road SOllth (south oJ SOllth Grady \\lay) South Carr Road Sooth 4 r -Street South Grady Way (immediately east of Rainier l\:yenue South) Rainier Avenue South (several segments between South 200 Street and South Grady Way) Only two short segments had 1990 volumes greater than 8,500 "pdpl: Sunset "Boulevard North, north of "Bronson (12,500) and Rainier Avenue South between I 405 and South Grady Way (14,175). 11-31 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 FIGURE 17 1990 PM PEi\.K HOUR INTERSECTION TOTAL ENTERING VOLUMES (use Renton Comp Plan LU Element l2rfd1 EIS Figure 21) 11-30 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 forecasted peak hour entering voffimes ia excess of 3,000, iacludiag 16 iatefsectioas with eatering volumes over 5,000. In the Rentoa sphere of iaflueace outside the current city limits, there were an additioaal 15 intersections with forecasted peak hour entering volumes over 3,000, of which three exceeded 5,000. 11-29 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 HOV lanes or intersection qeooe jwnp on Rainier AveBee/Airport Way/Logan Avenee SR 900 to North 6th StreetLogan AveBee HOV lanes or intersection qeeee jemp on Carr Road,' S.E. 176th/Petro'/itsky Road SR 167 to -14Oth AYeooe Sootheast • Transit Lane Rainier Aveooe Sol:lth South Grady Way to South Third Street High-volume arterial corridors in -1-990-2000 included Rainier Avenue and Airport Way, each with over 30,000 vehicles per day (vpd), and Renton Avenue Extension, North Park Drive-Sunset Boulevard Northeast, Northeast 3rd Street/4th Street, Talbot Road South, Southwest 43rd Street and South Grady Way- Main Avenue South, each carrying over 20,000 vpd. The forecasted ~2022 volumes showoo significant increases over -1-990-2000 volumes. On major arterial corridors, volumes were-are forecasted to increase on the order of 404Q% -100-W0% over the . W22-year period. The highest-volume arterial corridor in 2OW22 is Rainier Avenue, with forecasted daily volumes of 38,00020,000--66,00058,000 through Renton. Maple Valley Highway (SR169) also has forecasted volumes in excess of 50,00040,000 vpd. Other high-volume arterials with forecasted volumes in excess of 30,00030,000 vpd are listed below: Talbot Road Soeth (north of Soeth P1:Iget Drive) South Grady Way· rd Ih Airport ~aY-LLogan Avenue NE r Street-LN.E. 4-Street ---i"NHloiflrUfHh-4r --Stroot North Park Drive-/NE Sunset Boulevard R<I -Sunset Boulevard North (west of 1-405) Sol:lth 2-Street Bronson Way East ValIer Road (soeth of SW 43"!!-Street) West Valley Highway (SR 181) S/SW-_43L Street -I South Carr Road-IS.E. 176m Street---LPetrovitsky Road Traffic volumes on the freeway system were-are also forecasted to increase dramatically significantly by 2(}W2022, with daily volumes of over 200,000200,000 on most segments of 1-405 and over 120,000180,000 on SR-167 (Valley Freeway) through 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. Intersection Volwnes The overall functioning of an arterial system is controlled by the operation of its intersections. The relative and comparative ese of Renton intersections ooring the most critical period of the day (i.e., the p.m. peak hoer) was illestrated by compiling total entering yolemes. In 1990, the highest peak hoer entering voIwnes (see Fig\ire 1 7) OCC\lFfOO at the Sooth Graaj' Way/Rainier Avenee Sol:lth intersection (6,210). TV/o intersections carried 't'oll:lmes over 5,000: North rlSunset (5,720) and Airport/Rainier (5,490). Six other intersections had entering vommes of 4,0005,000 (three of these were on Rainier Aveooe Soeth), and nine others had volwnes over 3,000. Iacreases oyer 1990 entering 'Iolemes vlere OB the same order of magnirude as the iscreases is daily traffic volemes. Imersections all over the city were forecasted to experience significant increases in enterisg voleme. Is 1990, foer of the 130 Renton intersections aaalyzed had peak hoer tmterisg volemes over 5,000, asa a total of 27 intersections had entering volemes o'ler 3,000. For 2010, 60 intersections had 11-28 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~81l7J04 improvements which were-are assumed in 1994 to be implemented by W-W2022. Arterial improvements: • Puget Drive Southeast -Benson Road to 116th Avenue Southeast • Widen Park A'ienee North Bronson Way to North 1Q1II-StreetSouthwest 27th IStrander Boulevard Connection -Oakesdale Avenue Southwest to SR-181 • Relocate Hooser Way Senset Boule\'ard to North glll-StreetDuvall Avenue Northeast -Sunset Boulevard to City Limits Senset Boele'/ard I Relocated lIoeser Way grade separation. • Widen Bronson Way -South 2nd Street to Sunset Boulevard 'Niden Main Avenee SoHth Soeth Grady Way to SoHth 2nd-Street Revise Soeth 2nd Street Alignment Rainier Avenee Soeth to Main Avenee Soeth • Replace Lake Washington Boulevard / May Creek Bridge Park Drive to Coulon Park New Oakesdale Avenee Soethwest arterial Soeth"'/est 16111 to Soethwest 27111-Street • Replace Monster Road BridgeOakesdale Avenue Monster Road to SR-900 Widen Northeast 3rt! Street Senset Boelevard to Monterey Drive • South Grady Way Spot ImprovementsL-Rainier Avenue South to Talbot Road SoHth (SR ~ Partial Grade Separatienlntersection Improvements • Northeast 44th Street -Ripley Lane to Lake Washington Boulevard N.E. • SR-167 I East Valley Road Off-Ramp • NE 3rd Street -Sunset Boulevard to Edmonds Avenue N.E . . HOV improvements: Add lIO" lanes on SR 167 SR 1 g to Seeth Grady Way Complete lIO'! lanes on I 405 SR 167 to Sunset Boelevard • Full HOV interchange at 1-405/ Northeast 44th Street • Add HOV lanes on 1-5 -Seattle CBD to Tacoma I I • 1-405 HOV Direct Access at Park Drive or North 8th Street I ' • Half or full HOV interchange at 1-405/Benson Road or Talbot Road (SR-515) and HOV hmes on SR-515 or Benson Road South from the new HOV interchange to Puget Drive • FHll-HalfHOV interchange at SR-l,67/S.W. 27th Street and HOV lanes on S.W. 27th Street from SR-167 to Oakesdale Avenue Southwest • HOV lanes or intersection queue jump on SR-l69 -Sunset Boulevard to East City limits lIO" lanes or intersection qHeue jump on Senset Boelevard Bronson 'Nay to I 405 lIO" lanes or intersection qHeee jHmp on Park Drive N.E.L I 405 to Senset Boelevard Garden Aveooe to East City limits • HOV lanes or intersection queue jump on N.E. 3rd I N.E. 4th Street -1-405 to Monroe Avenue Northeast 11-27 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPOR. ;ION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 1-{)~ 2010 2022 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes legend Avemge ~ Daily Traffic r-r---r-tI City limit (~ij;~.;. 11-26 • Transportation Plan CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTAfoN ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 FIGURE 1._5~ 1990 2000 DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES Legend Average ~ Daily Traffic I-r-'--I-I City limit (@i:7!~,;;~ II-25 ~ Transportation Plan ~~i I ~JI m t-t---+-I! ~-+--il O~ OJ ~~I i h~ud:J t-t---t-II ~ l~ ~~, i ~~Hf~et~~ c -.. I ~ . I' . ~ I~ . i: '~I-! I~ II! ,r ~ If .' • ! t~ I' I. J ·.·0 II ~ ~~t ~ ~ ~I~~I~ ~h ! ~ ~~~~I~ df s ~ ~~ I I I ~ ~Ji ~ ~~~~II~ ~~I ! tt~~~~I~ ~~ ~~i m ~I ~~~~~I~ E~ ~~i I ~ I~~~~~ ~~ ~~ ~~t I ~ ~ I~tt~~~ ~ ~ .t~i ~ ~~~~~I~ ~b ! ( Ij ~~ ~j! i I~ ~~~~ttl~ <; ~: ~~i i ~) ~~~~~~~ : 9 . ~~ P I~ ~ ~~I i ~~~~~~~ I, ~ I ~ ~ "<t ~~ I ~ Q ! I; --t--.... .. , QO : I ~ i :~ =~ I' Hit If p , I ~ ~ '0 5~ §~ I: J <Il .~ , >-<: ~ <Il E-~ ,..~ ~ ~ CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117/04 FIGURE 1 4 ROAD SEGMENTS USED IN TRP .. VEL PATTERN ANALYSIS (use Renton Camp Plan L U Element fkfd1 EIS Figure 19) 11-22 ------------------------- I HUl ~ ! ! ! i i ~ ! ! ~ i!! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ !l~Ji I ~ll~!! ~~ ~~ !~~ i I un i uH~ i U H Hi ~ li~ ~~~! I i J~'~~ !'!~ I~ !!~ ! Ii!!~ i~!!! ~ ~~ li!~~ In~ !H,BH!Hrt·!1lH!B I ~ H in H~n i n H Hi , l Ih H, H! H~H ~ h B Hrx I~, p:.---~~~~~~~~I t> I ~ ! ~~!~ ~!j!~ ~~! ~! ~~! I~ ~t> II~! --=l::........:....· I ~~·l~~ l~J~' ~:;,...;.:;....;.; ~~. ~~l...=.:....-..~ ...:.::......,:j !~. !~. !=---!!I ::, CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mI0408/17/04 Travel Demand and Traffic Patterns Trayel demand into and out of Renton for existing (1990) and furore (2010) conditions was analyzed by compiling the estimated number of daily trips made within Renton and between Renton and 13 other general . areas in the region. Traffic patterns were ilmstrared by selecting key road segments and estimating the proportion of traffic on each that is traveling to/from the areas defined for the travel demand analysis. The 1990 traffic yolHffies are presented in coBjunction with the 2010 traffic yohlmes to provide comparison and to underscore the expected change in fumre traffic yommes. Ongoing transportation planning work will include refinement and updating tra\'el demand and traffic patterns based OIl new information on regional and local laOO use and traffic yolHffies that is anticipated to become a'/ailable in 2000. Daily Trayel Demand The origins and destinations of the trips that enter and leave Renton on a typical day in 1990 and 2010 were compiled in order to illustrate overall travel yohlmes aOO geographical travel patterns (see Table 1.1). In 2010, there will be 871,000 daily trips generated in Renton, a 52% increase from 1990. Of these trips, 28 % are internal (i. e., both origin and destination in Renton). Another 25 % of Renton daily trips travel to/from soothwest King County (Tukwila, Kent, l'\uburn, SeaTac, and Federal Way), and 11 % travel to Soos Creek, 17 % to Seattle, and 12 % to the Eastside. Traffic Patterns 1990 and 2010 traffic patterns were assessed by estimating the origins and destinations of daily traffic on the major arterials aOO freeways entering Renton shown in Figure 1 4. The origins and destinations are compiled in Tables 1.2 and 1.3. 122Q (see Table 1.2). On the freeways (I 405 aOO the Valley Freeway) 20 25 % of the traffic at the Renton City Limits is traveling to/from Renton. Arterials carrying a high proportion of Renton traffic include Sunset Bouleyard (70 %) and Benson High'i'/ay (67 %). Arterials carrying a moderate proportion of Renton traffic include Maple Valle~' Highway (50%), Grady Way (38%), and Northeast 4111 -Street (44 %) and Rainier AYenue (35 %). Several arterials carry only a small proportion of Renton traffic, including ML King Way £<I (18%) and Southwest 43 -Street (12%). 2QlQ (see Table 1.3). On the freeways (I 405 and the Valley Freeway) at the Renton City Limits, uOOer 30% of the forecasted traffic is traveling to/from Renton. The only arterial carrying a high proportion of Renton traffic ',vas Benson Hwy (98 %). All of the other arterials analyzed were forecasted to carry Renton traffic proportions of 30 % 45 % . Traffic Volumes Arterial Traffic Volumes In order to show the overall level and pattern of utilization of the Renton street/highway system, -l-99()..2000 and 2Q.W-2022 daily two-way traffic volumes were compiled (see Figures 144..and l~e~. The 2Q.W-2022 volumes reflect a freeway/arterial network comprised of facilities existing in -1-994-20020 and the following arterial and HOV II-20 -, \CJ ® I '--- C:Uy of_ton Principal Arteri.1s t._~_"".'-"" I. a... ..... "., ................ Bhd.N 1 1AgIn_ ...... N_~~_N_a 4. CW(hdr'" U._&_ .... ~~ 1 ....... IIarIIar.tr.., .. ~;&. ~ ~~~=-.=-ar!:::N ely .... .. NWPIM .. a ........... I4M_. .. NE'l'Iflll .......... IW.N.EeII .... :t~~-:-M~~~~~_NE ,2. NE .... aw. .. ~lM..lCEbEIIII:cIf .... :t :;:ahID-=-:a~=--:..' ..... ICbdr-15. 1:tIf8l. .. RIWIr-..,,*, .. 1 ,1." ...... =.-.. .. bPwt ..... ~~ =-~.=.1.,~:=-_S 11. ..... ., ...... .,. .......... IIorn.c.sv.,N It.IW00Q,JIOllIl .. WlllclJlmIII.r....ROIdI ~ ~tksr..:.:=-~~~:c.~ 24. o.tIcWI_ SW_.OdbSW71lla Minor Anerlats Collector ArtcriaI. 51 CW1.Sl"'Lhf_CN.~_ IW $1. SWI ... St.'*-~_.sw_~.DnotS., 'L AIIond.mIwa.NEr-S--Bhd.m.m !7ttIs.. ;:: ~:t!t:==!!'NE~...:':;.~E JS. w..-Icw.NEE-NEbU ••• NE.,.S.. J6. NiZ .. $t ..... w..-Iwt.NE.CItysa..,........., n. Nl1Odr.Sr. "-NEs-. BW. III t.co._ ""-N£. sa. Nt1"kr-NEs.. ....... W--;..NE St. 1dw.nd..-.N'E'-NEs.-BW .... NE,WSr. ::;::.~~~~~Nl~:r:~:-.::·:It .. 62.)11 JOrb $I,r-a.-mIM.Nrol'uli:lM.N 4J. NE444~_N!i'-J..40'ID&.rdlyliMirl .... IWl.a...-.... '-SWs.-BW ... ~"cityl.JMir. 6J. S),dftr-...... ..,...S.SUmadlIM.S 66. SL.nd: Iwa.I 1-, 1..1 St •• 5 Cady..,., 67 ............ ,Ij.SZ .. s. .• S .. ". 61. Worn. Iwt. 5 r-s ZM St ... S" St. It. o.n..u"..sr-SWs.. .. S7dtSa. '10. w-.n .... S" .... o.Ir-Wt "'-'t. sw. 5W 160 St. 71. SWl6cUc.·t-E..-Ydlfy ..... LWAwe.SW n. Eurwa., ..... !..l"II'ledok. ... SW4WSr. 71. T ....... SJSU .. I.r-sa.sIS .. s-Ldty .... 'H. SY41.kC-a.\\IIIy ... lDo.Ioaoblt~.SW ". SW.Ml\It.fIDa&.rv.Drr ....... OU-W',...5W 16. H.lJt.,.,.."''-SWs.r.-!W. ........ IH_.i 77 ...... IIW.NI-.N .... a.-... 1-4Oli , .. W ... NlN4D&SC ...... W.JOd.5t .... lab .... IIwd.N 79 ......... Jt..Nr-N~Sr .... l.IIb,.,.: .... N K1n; county Principal Art~rials lDO.CGllr:a-II,..., ... t..elDlbnalcIy ..... • tOt. ~Q6Ad._f:aIIcn.t~.a.-_IInb· t02. ............. Rd.. ............ IO ........ cllrbb ~: =~v:e:.:.~.:r.."!=~ttbMtRd. ~~ =..!'*~~'ii=-...:=..~~~1t4 RIl 107.IkIUIbc:-RdJIEt7lll~Rd. ... R-*lftclr~UURll 101. I2Z0111a ... " ... cIy .... lOazns ... 1I! 101.IIS1W1D .... SEnMl ... IIl ... R.-dy ..... lClflldy ..... Minor Arteria" !rom L..-. ~ Bhod.ID CoeI Cor-. Perbey. ~~ID~:i,-=~1D~ ..... .,.IefAd. ~:=Z,!d..rsE ~ClhSl. 1dry' .... 1DSEf7'88ISt. '. SE IrDIa RnIiOncilylmblD SE 11SUlSt. ConectDf Artal.1s ~l~ ~~:r~~~a:~er.-P--,. 120. 'ternAw.seIromSEtahSi.1DSf~SL· ,2t. SE ~ SL from AetUIn ~ IImIIa 10 Call CtMII PwtcwIy· ;~=~-~~.~=-- 125. l.ust\Aw. 121. SE 1M1hS 127. lAth AvI. 121. SE 13lRbS .. ____ _ 121. '751ft Aw. SElI'77Sb Aw. SE !ram 131. SE UIBZftSL1I'CIm t08d'lAw. SE to 13:2. l~Aw.SEIfomSE 1N!hSlJO 133, SEtMDta",;eF .......... EIvO.tram 130&. 1181!\Aft.SE!romSE 17S1t18L1D1 135. t24U1 AYe. SE !rom Sf 182nd 51. 10 131. SE 1D2nd Sl/1 .... ""' IrOI1I t..alh 137. se 2QS1h SI.IroaII32nd Aft. BE to , ,. 11ISlhAw.SEIrornSE208IhSlto • CIIy tit _atlil.rtorlBl BlINI "llmonl •.. of /ta InetllJ'Oratlon In 1996. Figure 1,3 ... 2003 Arterial Sy,;rem Functional Clas:<ificotions Lq.nJ PrIncipal Arterial Mln"' ..... "".1 Cullocror Arterial R.d\ton Ctry Umit Sph"",oi lnOucnu Plan > ~ ttl ~ en ~ en ~ "t1"t1 c:::-ZO (j c:::. ~~ o Z->~ l' (j &: en en g n ~ o Z en ~8 fii'< ~ =-0 Ii 000 ;:;;2 i~ I ~ i CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTA'nON ELEMENT Revised 61331()408/17/04 FIGURE 1-2 ARTERIAL SYSTEM CHARACTERISTICS Arterial System Characteristics (2003) Legend Signalized Intersection Number of Lanes CityUmit • 2 T Transportation Plan 11-18 ,. i. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8117104 resulting during adoption of the Interim Land Use Element; 2) !9Wlatest regional transportation plans, and Renton Arterial, HOV and transit plans; 3) ~latest Renton mode split assumptions; and, 4) refinements to the City of Renton transportation model. The following is a summary of the 1994 analysis. "Because Renton has major concentrations of employment as well as major retail centers and residential areas, total daily traffic and peak period commuter traffic (earoute to/from Renton area jobs) >,';ere both assessed as part of the traffic 'lollilBe analysis. Commuter traffic and other traffic (e.g., retail related) have very different orientation and time of day characteristics, and as a result, very different impacts on the road system. *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. 11-17 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Other key arterials that tie together the Renton street system include Grady Way and S.W. 43~-Street in the Renton Valley area, Talbot Road. and Puget Drive in southeast Renton, Park Drive, Logan Avenue, and Airport Way in Central Renton, and 3~Street / ~Street, Duvall Avenue, Union Avenue, and Edmonds A venue in north and east Renton. These arterials along with numerous other arterial streets link commercial, industrial, 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 intr~-city activity centers, have primarily high traffic volumes which travel at relatively fast vehicle speeds, and therefore, there is less emphasis on land use access. Grady Way in south central Renton and N.E. 3rd_/-4th 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. S. W. 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. 12th 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. Proposed classitications for commercial, ioo1:lstrial, and neighborhood access Streets will be e¥al1:lated d1:lring ongoing transportation plan.'1ing 'Nork. Traffic Volumes and Forecasts Existing (1-99Q2000) and forecasted 2Q.W-2022* traffic volumes were--have been analyzed in-the Transportation Section of the Renton Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element Environmental Impact Statement. After adoption of the Interim Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, an apdated traffic analysis was condl:lcted (in 1994) to reflect: 1) latest regional and Renton land use modificationsmodifications I1-16 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTA nON ELEMENT Revised 6123/0408/17/04 FIGURE 1-1 RENTON STREET/HIGHWAY SYSTEM Existing StreeVHighway System (2003) Legend ---~ City Limit I , I " ..... Renton Planning Area - Transportation Plan 11-15 N« ToSca" I I \ ;'.' CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELE~NT Revised ~8/17/04 Inventory of Existing Streets The existing (!9982002-3) street/highway system serving Renton is shown in Figure 1-1. The system includes two freeways: 1-405 and SR-167 (the "Valley Freeway"). 1~405 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 on the east side of Renton and Martin Luther King Junior Way on the west side), SR-169 (Maple Valley Highway), SR-515 (Benson Highway), and SR-167 (Rainier 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 Rainier Avenue section of SR-167 connects Renton with south Seatt1e~ The six state routes, 1-405, SR-167 (Valley Freeway), SR-900, SR-169, SR-515 and SR-167 (Rainier A venue), converge in central Renton within a half mile radius of each other. This close proximity makes for a complex traffic flow, as regional and local trips interact within a relatively short distance. II-14 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 T B: Eliminate disruptions which reduce the safety aBEl reasonable fuootioning of the local transportation system. Policies Policy T -S. Each street in the City should be assigned a functional classification based on factors including 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-9.1. Discourage sStreet vacations should be discouraged, particularly in pedestrian oriented areas such as Downtown and nearby residential areas that have developed around a traditional grid·· street pauem. 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. Policy T-9.2. When sStreet vacations areshould only be granted, there should be a showing justification that an overriding public purpose is served and that pedestrian and vehicular circulation is HOt impaired. 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-IO. Street standards should continue to be based on functional classification, land use objectives, and HOV Itransit/non-motorized facility needs. (The street standards should be coordinated with the Community Design policies 11-13 and Open Space and Parks policies in the Land Use Element.) Policy T-ll. Maintain aA 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-12. Maximize ([raffic flow on and accessibility to arterial Feadlrstreets should be managed to maximize person-carrying capacity while protecting local/neighborhood roads streets from increased traffic volmnes. -- Policy T-13. Provide a balance between protecting neighborhoods from increased through traffic while maintaining access to neighborhoods. Policy T-14. 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-15. Develop strategies to reduce adverse traffic impacts on local areas. (Areas of the City which require this type of intervention should be identified and addressed through the sub-area planning process, neighborhood plans or traffic mitigation programs which are implemented through development review.) Policy T-16. 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 ChaptersSections-:-and Land Use Element/Residential/Residential Streets Section.) CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~08/17/04 , A preliminary Transportation Element was prepared, and was included in the FEIS for the Land Use Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan (released January 29, 1993). In order to meet the July 1, 1994, deadline for adoption of Renton's Comprehensive Plan, a two phase approach ',vas used for development of the Transportation Element. The two phases comprised 1) development of the Interim Transportation Plan (adopted December 20, 1993), and 2) the preparation of the Transportation Element described in this document. In Phase 1, transportation plans, policies, and analyses prepared for the FEIS for the Land Use Element, and the adopted Interim Land Use Element of the Renton Comprehensive Plan, were silpplemented and combined ,with available existing plans, policies, and analyses to meet OMA requirements, and to produce the Interim Transportation Plan. The Interim Transportation Plan was referenced in the Land Use Element FEIS and adopted by reference. More detail and refinements were prepared in Phase 2 to complete the Transportation Element described in this document, which serves as the Transportation Element of Renton's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan (and Transportation Element) Vias adopted on February 20, 1995. SubsequeIit 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 amendments (December 8, 1997 and July 27, 1998) to the Comprehensive Plan (and this Transportation Element). Further transportation planning work by the City has resulted in the 1999 amendments which are incorporated in this Transportation Element. 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 increases congestion on local streets or impacts 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'sthe City of Renton's street system- including existing functional classifications as well as a description of the City'sRenton's Arterial Plan. The Street Network Chapter also contains definitions 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-oj-Service Framework Policies and other local jurisdictions.) Objectives The Street Network Chapter is based on the following objectives: 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. JI-12 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~81l7/04 Growth Management Act Requirements The Growth Management Act (GMA) 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 services 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 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 level of service 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; 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 level of service 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. Transportation Element De:velopment Process The GMA reEJ.Uires the Transportation Element to address certain key sub elements as outlined above. Ten sub elements (chapters) consistent '+'lith the GMA were identified for the Transportation Element, including: Street Net\¥ork, Transit, HOV, Non motorized, Commute Trip Reductionl Transportation Demand Management (CTRlTDM), Airport, Freight, Financial, Environmental and Natural Resources, and Intergovernmental Coordination. II-ll CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 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 many 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 (Central Business District) parking restrictions and/or removal apply only to commuter/employee parking and not to business patron/customer parking. 11-10 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~/17/04 As noted above, the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to create a desirable land use pattern and serve the-Iand uses with the-a multi-modal transportation system. This Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan comprises a set of framework transportation policies to support Renton's land use Vision (ComprehensiYe PlaB Irnroduction, page 12) 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. Policies -Policy T -1. Land use plans and regulations should be used to guide development of thea transportation tTransportation elemern 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 model should be used in estimating travel demand. II·9 Policy T -6. Land use patterns which-should support transit and non-motorized should be promotedmodes of travel. Policy T -7. 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 minimized through techniqaesmitigated by implementing programs, such as transportation management programs implemented through cooperative agreements at the work place, flexible work hours and/or sub-area planning such aspolicies supporting increased density.) Ihcr~-as~ajitrtG\lsedeh~iti'es -arid-abalance'.Jo'f· i·'!I'iJ, ;H~~~:Wi~es ;in ~~*r~ail:seittI;r~rwill'i~~~it~:ql (8,¥et:~ii,4:-shi:)~ter v~iCl~ ::ti=ips.-)\speopl~ ~" ,", ,) "" "\l,. ~ ,', \_. .' ..•• ', -'~.': ...... " ", ." . ·r;.' '" :;. " '.' . ". { ',,' 1 ,-.;.' , begjij ·te-:liy~: ¢Jo.$e( to' c~RiPloymetwaHd "">"~,:-""~ .• ';,>.j~'.r.I·/·:\·_'<""·_·,,·'1~ •. ,;,\_.:,~ .• ,,\'::'j'.,"<:-' ,~! .. -.... :'~.;.; :S,~dPPI~;;~~ey,-,ylllJ_ F1o:-lo~er -#eed_ to_:~t1.~¢-".tQ ~e~e' fac~fiti~s;aiKl";.~y"i+¥~Jro:e:iiBle, to~:lif$: triPs',)~~~J\i.rig)n~te~tVer1;ehiCle trips-. J:n? addition\tc):the Tnmsp6itatioIi LaHd,·tJ~e iritera'ctida;-al¥i,thei, 'i~sue, that 'petvaaes)ii~)i}j~ the' ehapte.rs; Q(tlle ttanspiJrtatioa:~lemeiids fua,t' 6f'park1~> -.;nie-locatjoH' ana-.suppiY :M pafkiilg:!ls:aIl'i~.tegral'parfof ~eJobal _ ,_ tpiHsflprta~It)fi s'y-stem.-InadeqHate parki~g~ctili. lBer~a§e;¢oBgestion'oH streets as peoplecir~l~ imamint'fQi'avaiiablespaces.· Too mueh parkiHg:i~airi~~ffi~!eHt use oflaBd and CaB de.~eftI"~risit:us·e: ,A, proper"balanc@ needs-ib:9~ ~chl~yetibetweeirparking -sUpply -and deRla~';; Sate-nite·parking aBd smittle servicestHld coneqtiyestrU9tUredparldBg are potentiLil_ me.tfiods ,for increasing the parking_ supply: CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORT A TION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 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 GMA provides a frame\york for land use planning and development regulation. The GMA required the City of Renton to adopt a comprehensive plan (generalized coordinated land use policy). The comprehensive plan is to include a plan for each of the following elements: land use; housing; utilities; capital facilities; and transportation. The GMA further mandates that the transportation element be concurrent with the land use element to the extent that development is BOt to occur v/ithout a commitment to meet transportation demands resulting from such development. Following adoption of the comprehensive plan, the City of Renton has to enact development regulations that are consistent with, and help implement, the adopted Comprehensive Plan (and Transportation Element). The goal of the Renton Transportation Element is to provide Ita balanced multi-modal transportation system which 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 February 20, 1995. 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 amendments (December 8, 1997, July 27, 1998, August 14, 2000, and August 13,2001) to the Comprehensive Plan (and Transportation Element). Further transportation planning work by the City has resulted in the 2004 amendments, which are incorporated in this Transportation Element. 11-8 I CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1.1 Total Daily Person Trips Table 1.2 1990 Daily Trayel Patterns of Traffic on Selected Road Segments Table 1.3 2010 Daily Traysl Patterns of Traffic on Selected Road Segments Table 1.41 Renton Arterial Plan Table 2.1 Daily Transit Trips Table 3.1 Daily ,.\uto Passenger Trips Table 4.1 Master Trail Plan Proposed Non motorized Facilities Table 4.21 Proposed Bicycle Routes Table 5.1 Central Subarea Parking Summary Table 8.1 20-Year (1995 2015) Transportation Program Cost Table 8.2 Source of Transportation Funds Table 8.3 City of Renton Six-Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) 2000 20052QQi. 20082004 20092005-2010 II-7 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6mSI17104 TABLE OF FIGURES Figure 1-1 Existing Street/Highway System Figure 1-2 Arterial System Characteristics Figure 1-3 Arterial System Functional Classifications Figure 1 4 Road Segments Used in Travel Pattern Analysis Figure 1 ~ -1-900-2000 Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 1-6~ ~2022 Daily Traffic Volumes Figure 1 7 1990 PM Peak Hour Intersection Total Entering Volumes Figure 1 8 . 1990 Average Daily Traffic Volume Per Lane Figure 1 9 1990 PM Peak Hour Intersection Entering Volume Per Approach Lane Figure l--W§ Renton Arterial Plan Figure 1-+1-1 Arterial Plan Improvements Figure 2-1 Existing Transit Service Figure 2-2 Regional Transit System Figure 2-3 Renton Transit Plan Figure 3-1 Renton HOV Plan Figure 4-1 Existing Non-Motorized Facilities Figure 4 '2 Proposed Non Motorized Facilities Figure 5-1 Downtown Core Existing Parking Summary 2001 Figure 7-1 Truck Routes 11-6 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Mitigation Proeess .............................................................................................................................. II 91 Con61:lrreney Management System ..................................................................................................... II 92 Environmental and JIo.atHral R-esol:lfces ................................................................................................... II 93 Objeethres ........................................................................................................................................... II 93 Polieies .............................................................. ~ ................................................................................ 11 93 l\ir Quality Non attaimnent Areas .................................................................................................. II 94 Air Quality Severity of Violations .................................................................................................. II 95 Air Quality Implementation Plan .................. ; ................................................................................. II 95 Improving '.Vater Quality ................................. : .......................... ; ...................................................... II 96 Intergovernmental Coordination ..................................................... : ...................................................... II 96 Current Coordination l\etivities ......................................................................................................... II 96 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................... II 98 Polieies ............................................................. ~ ................................................................................. II 98 Impacts on A:dj acent Jurisdiotions ...................................................................................................... II 99 Impacts on Regional Transportation Plan .......................................................................................... II 99 Strategies to Address IBconsistencies ................................................................................................. 11 99 Ongoing Transportation Plan 'Vorle .................... .' .................................................................................. II 99 Bibliography ......................................................... ,' ......................... : ..................................................... II 104 11-5 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~/17/04 Existing Transit Seryice .............................................................................................................. : ...... II 40 Future Regional Accessibility ....................................................................................................... ; .... II 43 Transit Plan ...... : ...................................................................................................... , ........................... II 43 Transit Usage and ~4ode Split ...................................................... ; ..................................................... II 45 Lellel of Service .................................................................................................................................. II 46 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOY) ........................................................................................................... II 50 Objectilles ........................................................................................................................................... II 50 Policies ........................................ ; ...................................................................................................... II 50 Existing HOV Facilities ..................................................................................................................... II 50 HO'/ Plan ........................................................................................................................................... II 51 Ridesharing and ~4ode Split ............................................................................................................... II 54 Le'lel of SeFVice .................................................................................................................................. II 55 Non ~4otorized Transportation ............................................................................................................... II 58 Objectiv:es ........................................................................................................................................... II 58 Policies ............................................................................................................................................... II 58 Existiflg Bi6J'cle afld Pedestrian Facilities .......................................................................................... II 59 Neighborhood and Regioflal Ascess ................................................................................................... II 62 Bisycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plafl ................................................................................................ II 62 Transportatiofl DemaRd MaflagemeRtI Commute Trip Redustion (TDM/CTR) .................................... II 67 Objecti'les ........................................................................................................................................... II 67 Polisies ............................................................ , .................................................................................. II 67 Existing Parkiflg Swply aRd Demand ............. ; .................................................................................. II 68 ParkiRg Policy R€lYie't'l ....................................................................................................................... II 69 Employers' Mode Split ....................................................................................................................... II 69 TDM/CTR Programs .......................................................................................................................... II 69 ParkiRg ~4anagemeRt RegulatioRs ...................................................................................................... II 70 Aimort .................................................................................................................................................... II 70 Objecti'les ........................................................................................................................................... II 70 Policies ................................................................................................................................................ II 70 Airport Facilities ................................................................................................. ; ............................... II 71 t\irport .Astiyities ................................................................................................................................ II 72 Airport Master Plan Rele'laflt Documents .......................................................................................... II 72 Airport Master Plafl Implementatiofl .................................................................................................. II 73 Freight .................................................................................................................................................... II 74 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................... II 74 Policies ............................................................................................................................................... II 74 Truck Routes .......................................................................... : ........................................................... II 74 IRYeRtory of Local Rail System Facilities and Users ......................................................................... II 76 RegioRal PLccessibility ........................................................................................................................ II 76 FiRaflsiRg afld ImplemeRtatioR ............................................................................................................... II 78 Obi estiYes ........................................................................................................................................... II 78 Policies ............................................................................................................................................... II 78 Transportatiofl Program Costs ............................................................................................................ II 79 IRyeRtory ofFufldiRg Sourees ............................................................................................................. II 79 FURdiflg Program ............................................................................................................................ : ... II 83 FURdiRg lALssessment ..................................................................... : ..................................................... II 89 JI-4 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6m8/17/04 Airport Facilities ...................................................................................................................... 8784848479 Airport Activities ..................................................................................................................... 8784848480 Airport Master Plan Relevant Documents .......... : .................................................................... 8884848480 Airport Master Plan Implementation ....................................................................................... 9086868682 Freight ......................................................................................................................................... 9087878782 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 9087878782 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 9087878783 Truck Routes ........................................................................................................................... 9187878783 Inventory of Local Rail System Facilities and Users .............................................................. 9389898985 Regional Accessibility ....................................... ; ..................................................................... 9489898985 Financing and Implementation .............................. : ..................................................................... 9591919187 Objectives ..................................................................................... ,' .......................................... 9692929287 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 9692929287 Transportation Program Costs ................................................................................................. 9692929288 Inventory of Funding Sources ........................... ,' ..................................................................... 9793939388 Funding Program .............................................. ~ .................................................................... 1 0096969692 Funding Assessment ........................................................................................................ 1 071 021 021 0298 Mitigation Process ............................................ : ............................................................ 1 08104104.104100 Concurrency Management System ................................................................................ 110105105105101 Environmental and Natural Resources .............................................................................. 111106106106102 Objectives ........................................................ : ............................................................. 111106106106102 Policies .......................................................................................................................... 111107107107102 Air Quality --Implementation Plan ............................................................................... 113109109109104 Improving Water Quality ................................ : ............................................................. 114109109109105 Intergovernmental Coordination ....................................................................................... 114109109109105 Objectives ........................................................ ~ ............................................................. 114110110110105 Policies ............................................................ ' .............................................................. 115110110110106 Current Coordination Activities .................................................................................... 115110110110106 Impacts on Adjacent Jurisdictions ...................................................................... : .......... 118113113113109 Impacts on Regional Transportation Plan ............ : ....................................................... .118113113113109 Strategies to Address Inconsistencies ............. : .............................................................. 118113113113109 Ongoing Transportation Plan Work ......................................................................................................... 109 SUIl'\H\ary ................................................................................................................................................... II 6 Polioies ................................................................................................................................................. II 7 Growth Management Aot Requirements .............................................................................................. II 8 Transportation Element Development Prooess ..................................................................................... II 8 Street }~etvt'ork ................................................... : ...................................................................................... II 9 Obi ectives ............................................................................................................................................. II 9 Polioies ............................................................................................................................................... II 10 Inventory of Existing Streets .............................................................................................................. II 10 Street System Charaoteristios ............................................................................................................. II 13 Existing Street funotional Classifioations ............................... ; .......................................................... II 13 Traffio \'olumes and foreoasts ..................... : ..................................................................................... II 13 Traditional Level ofServioe (LOS) .............. ; ..................................................................................... II 29 NeVI LOS Policy ................................................................................................................................. II 30 Level Of Service (LOS) Standard ............................... : ...................................................................... II 32 :Arterial Plan ............................................................................ : ........................................................... II 33 Transit ..................................................................................................................................................... II 39 Objeotives ........................................................................................................................................... II 39 Policies ............... : ............................................................................................................................... II 39 1I-3 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT . Revised 6m8/17/04 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page SUmrlla~ .~.' .. ~'.'~.::~~.~:~ ...................................................................................................................................... 88 Policies ..............................................................................................................................................•.... 99- Growth Management Act Requirements ............................................................................................ 11 U Street Network .............................. · .......................................................................................................... 12~ Objectives ........................................................................................................................................... 12~ Policies ............................................................................................................................................... 13~ Inventory of Existing Streets .............................................................................................................. 13H Street System Characteristics ............ ~ ................................................................................................ I6+§. Existing Street Functional Classifications ............................................. ~ ............................................ I6+§. Traffic Volumes and Forecasts .............. · ............................................................................................. I6+§. ·LOS Policy ............................................................................................... : .............................. 3432323231 Level Of Service (LOS) Standard ........................................................................................... 3735353534 Arterial Plan ............................................................................................................................ 3937373736 Transit ........................................................................................................................................... 4947474743 Objectives ..................................................................................................... : .......................... 4947474743 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 4947474743 Existing Transit Service .......................................................... ~ ............................................... 5048484844 Local Access ............................................................................................................................ 5149494944 Eastside Connections .............................................................................................................. .5149494944 South King County Connections ............................................................................................. 5149494944 East-West Connections ............................................................................................................ 5149494945 Future Regional Accessibility ................................................................................................ .5553535349 Transit Plan .................. ~ ........................................................................................................... 5553535349 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................... 5956565652 High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) ................................................................ ; ............................... 6361616157 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 6361616157 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 6361616157 Existing HOV Facilities .......................................................................................................... 6361616157 HOV Plan ................................................................................................................................ 6462626258 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................... 6866666661 Non-Motorized Transportation .................................................................................................... 7169696965 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 7169696965 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 7169696965 Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities ............................................................................... 7371717066 Neighborhood and Regional Access ...................................................................... ; ................. 7673737369 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Plan ..................................................................................... 7673737369 Transportation Demand Management! Commute Trip Reduction (TDM/CTR) ......................... 8178787874 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 8178787874 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 8178787874 Existing Parking Supply and Demand ..................................................................................... 8279797975 Parking Policy Review ..................... ; ...................................................................................... 8481818177 Employers' Mode Split ............................................................................................................ 8481818177 TDM/CTR Programs ............................................................................................................... 84 81818177 Parking Management Regulations ........................................................................................... 8582828278 Airport ......................................................................................................................................... 8582828278 Objectives ................................................................................................................................ 8582828278 Policies .................................................................................................................................... 8582828278 11-2 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6m8/17/04 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 cOminuting 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, which are responsibly integrated with the City's transportation system and land use pattern. 7. Maintain and improve truck and freight rail access to Renton industrial areas, and tErintegrate 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. Attain and maintain regional air and "'later quality standards ',vithin the City of Renton and to comply with regional, state, and Federal air and .. vater quality standards. 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 information exchange, cooperative planning of common transportation, development of services and eapital improvements, and discussion of issues pertinent to present and future transportation-related interestes of the citizens and businesses of the City of Renton. II-I City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 Revised Policy LV 30t.CD-SO. All exterior lighting should be focused and directed away from adjacent properties and wildlife habitat to prevent spill-over or glare. Revised-Policy LV 302.CD-S1. Lighting should be used as one means to improve the visual identification of residences and businesses. Revised Policy LV 303.CD-S2. Lighting fixtures should be attractively designed to complement the architecture of a development, the site, and adjacent buildings. Revised Policy LU 304.CD-S3. Lighting within commercial and public areas should be located and designed to enhance security and encourage nighttime use by pedestrians. I. Urban Center Note: Community Design policies specifically applicable to the Urban Center are located in the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 13 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 Revised Policy LV 291CD-69 .• Appearance of parking lots should be improved by screening through appropriate combinations of landscaping, fencing, and berms. Revised Policy LV 294.CD-70. Structural supports for overhead traffic signals should be designed to diminish visual impacts. New-Policy bU-oCD-71. All utility lines should be placed underground. G. Signage New-Objective bY-tCD-N: Commercial signs in Renton should be regulated by citywide standards. Revised Policy LV 295.CD-72: Sign guidelines regulations should direct the type, size, design, and placement of signs in order to ensure reasonable aesthetic and safety considerations. Revised Policy LV 296.CD-73. All billboards should be removed and signs with moving parts ef images should be eliminated. Revised-Policy LV 298.CD-74. All bulky and unusually large or tall signs should be eliminated. Revised Policy_LV 299.CD-75. Sign placement should be limited to on-site locations. Revised Policy LV 30(),.CD-76. Signs should be regulated as an integral part of architectural design. In general, signs should be compatible with the rest ofthe building and site design. Revised Policy LV l03.CD-77.-Consolidate information for mixed-use development on one signto reduce the number of signs. Revised Policy LV l04.CD-78.-Locate signage to reduce light and glare impacts to residential areas. Revised Policy LV 297.CD-79. Interpretive and directional signs for major landmarks .... neighborhoods, and viewpoints should be established to enhance community identity. H. -Lighting New-ObjectiveCD:-O: Lighting systems within the Cit yin public right-of-ways should be provided to improve safety, aid in direction-finding, and provide information for commercial and other business purposes. Excess lighting beyond what is necessary should be avoided. Page 12 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 New-Policy #+-CD-59.: A citywide street and sidewalk system should provide linkages within and between neighborhoods. Such system should not unduly increase pass-through traffic, but should create a continuous, efficient, interconnected network of roads and pathways throughout the City. Revised Policy LU 317.CD-60. Criteria should be developed to locate pedestrian and bicycle connections in the City. Criteria should consider: . a) linking residential areas with employment and commercial areas; b) providing access along arterials; c) providing access within residential areas;. d) filling gaps in the existing sidewalk system where appropriate; and e) providing access through open spaces and building entries to shorten walking distances. Revised Policy LU 73CD-61. Residential streets should be constructed to the narrowest widths (distance from curb to curb) feasible without impeding emergency vehicle access. Revised Policy LU 74CD-62. Landscaped parking strips should be considered for use as a safety buffer. between pedestrians and moving vehicles along arterials and collector streets. Revised-Policy LV 75CD-63. Intersections should be designed to minimize pedestrian crossing distance and increase safety for disabled pedestrians. ' Revised Policy LU 107CD-64. Evaluate e~isting intersections of arterial roadways for opportunities to create focal points, if such focal points do not reduce vehicular or pedestrian safety. Revised Policy LU 76CD-65 .• To visually improve the streetscape, increase the safety of perimeter : sidewalks, and facilitate off-street parking, construction of alleys providing rear access to service entries and garages should be encouraged. Alleys are preferred in small: lot subdivisions to provide higher quality site-planning that allows garage access from the rear and reduces curb cuts and building mass oil narrow lots. . ' Revised Policy LV 77.CD-66. Sidewalks or walking paths should be provided along residential streets. Sidewalk width should be ample to safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian traffic. Revised Policy LV 290.CD-67. Street trees should be used to reinforce visual corridors along major' boulevards and streets. Ne'w PolieyLV .PoJicy CD-68. Street trees should be protected. Ifremoval is necessary for municipal purposes such as infrastructure improvements or maintenance trees should be replaced with equivalent size and variety. Upon adoption of citywide standards, street trees should be upgraded consistent with the newthose standards. Page 11 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 Revised Current Policy LV. 78CD-SO. Trees should be planted along residential streets, in parking lots requiring landscaping, and in other pervious areas as the opportunity arises. Trees should be retained whenever possible and maintained using Best Management Practices as appropriate for each type. Revised Policy LV 314CD-S1. Landscaping is encouraged, and may be required, in parking areas to improve their appearance and to increase drainage control. Revised Policy LV 288CD-S2. Landscape and surface water drainage plans should be coordinated to maximize percolation of surface water and minimize runoff from the site. New-Objective I:::rlJ-CD-K: Site plans for new development projects for all uses, including residential subdivisions, should include landscape plans. New-Policy bUCD-S3.-: Landscape plans for new-proposed development projects should include public entryways, street rights-of-way, stormwater detention ponds, and all common areas. New-Policy LlHCD-S4.-Residential subdivisions and multi-family residential projects should include planting of street trees according to an adopted citywide landscape plan. Revised Policy LV 28G.CD-SS. Maintenance plans and maintenanoe programs should be required for landscaped areas in development projects, including anti-entryways, street rights-of-way, stormwater retention/detention ponds, and common areas in residential subdivisions. New-Policy;-CD-56. Surface water retention retention/detention ponds should be landscaped appropriately for the location of the facility. F. Streets, Sidewalks, and Streetscape Revised Objective bY-NCD-L:: Promote development of attractive, walkable neighborhoods and shopping areas by ensuring that streets are safe, convenient, and pleasant for pedestrians. Revised-Policy LV 316CD-S7. The design of pedestrian -oriented environments should address safety as a first priority. Safety measures should include generous separation of cars and pedestrians, reducing the number of curb cuts and driveways, having numerous, well-marked street crossings and providing street and sidewalk lighting. Revised Policy LV 289CD-S8. Aesthetic improvements along street frontages should be provided, especially for properties abutting major streets and boulevards. Incentives should be provided for the inclusion of streetscape amenities including: landscaping, public art, street furniture, paving, signs, and planting strips in developing and redeveloping areas. Objective CD-M: Develop a system of residential streets, sidewalks, and alleys that serve both vehicles and pedestrians. Page 10 'j City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 ~Objective #t-CD-I: New Cf.ommercial buildings should be architecturally compatible with their surroundings in terms of their bulk and scale, exterior materials, and color when existing development is consistent with the adopted land use vision and intent statements in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Reyised Policy LU 313CD-43. A variety of architectural design and detailing should be encouraged as long as site functions connect to adjacent development. Innovative use of building materials and finishes should be promoted. Reyised Policy LU 160CD-44. Development should provide appropriate landscaping and fa9ade ; I treatment when located along designated City arterials or adjacent to less intense developments in order to mitigate potentially adverse visual or other impacts. E. Landscaping Summary: Landscaping is a key element of the City. It can be used to create distinctive character for developments, neighborhoods and along city streets; to frame views; to block unsightly views; or mitigate the scale of large buildings. It can be also used to reduce traffic noise levels and the effects of pollution. Objective CD-J-: The City of Renton should adopt a citywide landscape plan that furthers the aesthetic goal of the City and provide guidance for future development and infrastructure improvements .. New Objeeti'fe LU : Preserve to the greatest extent possible Renton's inventory oftrees. Reyised Policy LU 285CD-45. Existing mature vegetation and distinctive trees should be retained and ' I protected in developments. New ObjeetiYeLU : The City of Renton should :have a oitywide landscape plan. Revised Policy LV 283CD-46. A comprehensive landscape architectural plan for the City should be developed. The plan should include recommendations for preferred street and landscape trees. Revised Policy LU 281CD-47. Landscape plans should reflect take into consideration the potential impact of mature vegetation on significant views so that future removal of view-blocking trees will not be necessary. Policy CD-48. A comprehensive landscape plan for the City should include areas such as those adjacent to freeways and major highways and other public rights-of-way. The installation of this landscaping . should be encouraged. Reyised Policy LU 282CD-49. Citywide comprehensive development standards, for landscape design, installation, and maintenance should be developed. Page 9 City of Renton Community Design Elt;ulent 8-20-04 Revised New Objective CD-F: Protect and enhance public views of distinctive features from public streets and other focal points within the City and the surrounding area. Revised Policy LU 277CD-36. Roads with scenic views and view corridors along roadways in the City should be identified and preserved through application of development standards. Rtwised Policy LU 279CD-37. Access from public roadways to views of features of distinction should be enhanced through the development of public viewpoints where appropriate. ReYised-Policy LU 278CD~38. Neighborhood identity should be established by featuring views, highlighting landmarks, or creating focal points of distinction. Revised Policy LU l06CD-39. Focal points should have a combination of public areas, such as parks or plazas; architectural features, such as towers, outstanding building design, transit stops, or outdoor eating areas; and landscaped areas. These features should be connected to pedestrian pathways. D. Architecture Summary: It is not the intent of these policies to dictate the architectural style of structures in the City of Renton. The Community Design architectural policies are intended to encourage design of structures that fit well into the neighborhood, reflect the physical character of Renton, mitigate potential negative impacts of development, and function well in meeting the needs of both the building occupant and the community. New-Objective WCD-G-t---=-Architecture should be distinctive and contribute to the community aesthetic. Reyised Policy LU 306CD-40. Structures should be designed (e.g. building height, orientation, materials, color and bulk;) to mitigate potential adverse impacts, such as glare, shadows, aesthetics, on adjacent less intense land uses and transportation corridors. Reyised Policy LV 308CD-41. Rooftops that can be seen from public streets, parks, and open space should be designed to hide mechanical equipment and to incorporate high-quality roofing materials.':" Reyis·ed Policy LU 312CD-42. Design characteristics in larger new developments or individual building complexes should contribute to neighborhood andlor district identity. Revised Objective LU-PCD-H-;-~Ensure that structures built in residential areas are consistent with the City's adopted land use vision and intent statements in the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element. Page 8 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 Re'lised Policy LV llOCD-29. In mixed-use developments with ground-floor retail uses, residential parking areas should not conflict with pedestrian and vehicular access to the retail component of the project. Revised Policy LV 314CD-30. If transit service is available, parking requirements may be reduced or shared parking serving multiple developments may be allowed. Revised Policy LV l11CD-31. In mixed-use developments, residential uses should be connected to other uses through design features such as pedestrian walkways and common open space. Revised Policy_LV 315CD-32. Neighborhoods should have human-scale features, such as pedestrian pathways and public spaces (e.g. parks or plazas), that have discernible edges, entries and borders. B. Gateways Summary: Community identity can be effectively communicated at City and district/neighborhood entries through the designation of these areas as "gateways." Gateways are a means to call attention to the entrance' to the City or aft more specific geographic area and bid welcome. Revised Objective LV QQCD-E: Highlight entrances to the City through the use of the "Gateways" designation. Revised Policy LV 273CD-33. Identify primary and secondary gateways to the City and develop them as opportunities arise. Revised Policy LV 275CD-34. The level of development intensity at a gateway should be used, with location, to determine whether it is a primary or secondary gateway. Rev4sed-Policy LV 274CD-3S. Each gateway should have its own unique, identifiable design treatment in terms of landscaping, building design, signage, street furniture, paving, and street width. Special consideration of gateway function should be demonstrated through design ofthese elements. C. Views and Focal Points Summary: Views are a resource that should be 'preserved for public access to the greatest extent possible. Focal points should be created and used to enhance the community. Page? City of Renton Community Design Elt.ulent 8-20-04 • prevent projections of building elements into required setbacks in a pattern that reduces provision oflight, visual separation, and/or require variances of modification of standards. New-Policy CD-19: During development, significant trees, either individual individually trees or or in stands oftrees, should be relocated or preserved. Replacement should be required ..... hen preservation is not feasible due to: a. the location of trees, b. long term viability based on tree condition or health, or c. conflicts with minimum density.preserved, replaced, or as a last option, relocated. Revised Policy LV 292CD-20. Development should be visually and acoustically buffered from adjacent freeways. Revised Policy LV 293CD-21. Development should have buildings oriented toward the street or a common area rather than locate front entries ontoward parking lots. New Poliey: Project proponents should use creativity in project design and landscaping on the project site and in the abutting public right of ].vay. Revised Policy LV 162CD~22: When appropriate, due to scale, use, or location, GRon-site open space and recreational facilities in developments should be required. Re¥ised-Policy LV 163CD-23. Developments should be designed so that public access to and use of parks, open space, or shorelines, is available where ·such access would not jeopardize the environmental attributes of the area. Revised Policy LV 307CD-24. Site design of development should relate, connect, and continue design quality and site function from parcel to parcel. Revised Policy LV 309CD-2S. Site design should address the effects oflight, glare, noise, vegetation removal, and traffic in residential areas. Overall development densities may be reduced within the allowed density range to mitigate potential adverse impacts. Revised Policy LV 70CD-26. Streets, sidewalks, and pedestrian or bike paths should be arranged as an interconnecting network. The use of cul-de-sacs should be discouraged. A "flexible grid" pattern of streets and pathways, with a hierarchy of widths and corresponding traffic volumes, should be used. Revised Policy LV 71CD-27. New streets should be designed to provide convenient access and a choice of routes between homes and parks, schools, shopping, and other community destinations. Revised Poliey LV 72. Access to and from individual residences should be restricted along primary arterials. Residential site design should ensure that primary access to residences comes from collector streets. Revised Policy LV lOSCD-2S. Non-residential development should have site plans that provide street access from a principal arterial, consolidate access points to existing streets, and have internal vehicular circulation that supports shared access. Page 6 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 Revised Policy LV 80CD-16. During land division, all lots should front streets or parks. Discourage single tier lots with rear yards backing onto a street. Where a single single-tier plat is the only viable alternative due to land configuration, significant environmental constraints, or location on a principal arterial, additional design features such as a larger setbacks, additional landscaping, or review of fencing should be required. (See Policy LV .) ! I Evaluation of land configuration should consider whether a different layout of streets or provision of alleys is physically possible and could eliminate the need for a single single-tier plat. I Evaluation of environmental constraints should consider whether the location and extent of critical areas prevents a standard plat design. Review of fencing should ensure that the development does not "tum its back" to public areas. Revised Policy LV 306CD-17. Development should be designed (e.g. building orientation, setbacks, .1 landscape areas and open space, parking, and outdoor activity areas) to result in a high quality development as a primary goal, rather than to maximize density as a first consideration. Projects at the upper end of density ranges should only be approved when the following criteria are fully addressed in project level submission. Density may be-reduced \vithin the-allowed range to bring projects into compliane-e-;. a.Trees are retained, relocated, or planted to retain or create enough vegetative cover or to re establish sufficient vegetative cover to create street appeal for nevI development. Street appeal means presence of enough landscaping and tree foliage to create a landsoape amenity, shade, and high quality walking environment in an UIban context. b.Lot size/configuration and lot ooverage is sufficient to provide private recreation/outdoor spaoe for each resulting lot. C.Structures can be sited to provide entry, window, and door locations located to create and maintain privacy on adjoining yards and buildings. Siting structures for increased privaoy means there is sufficient room on the lot and/or consideration given to: architectural and landscape design to Dprevent v.Andow and door openings looking directly into another struoture, Dprevent overreliance on fencing, or Dprevent projections of building elements into required setbacks in a pattern that reduces provision of light, and visual separation, or requite variances ofmodifioation of standards. Policy CD-18-: Density may be reduced within ,the allowed range to bring projects into compliance, if: a. Trees are retained, relocated, or planted to create sufficient vegetative cover to provide a landscape amenity, shade, and high quality walking environment in an urban context. b. Lot size/configuration and lot coverage is sufficient to provide private recreation/outdoor space for each resulting lot. c. Structures can be sited so that entty, window, and door locations create and maintain privacy on adjoining yards and buildings. Architectural and landscape design should: • prevent window and door openings looking directly into another structure, • prevent overreliance on fencing, or Page 5 City of Renton Community Design Elvuient 8-20-04 b.New structures should incorporate some materials such as siding and roofing that are used on adjacent structures. &.b.Parking structures Garages, whether attached or detached, should be repesented constructed using the same pattern of development established in the vicinity. fr..c.Structuresshould have fencing, entries, windows, and doors located to maintain privacy in neighboring yards and buildings. IV. New Development Summary: Objectives and polices that address new development are intended to serve multiple purposes. First, concerns about new development "fitting in" to established areas of Renton have resulted in an increased awareness that site design and architectwe, when planned to be compatible with the context of the neighborhood or commercial area, can make the "fit" of the new project more comfortable. Second, these objectives and policies provide assistance to project proponents so when planning new development for Renton, they can be guided in their choices. Third, city officials, who must make decisions regarding new projects, can use these objectives and policies to guide their review of project proposals. Elements of new development represented by objectives and policies in this section include: A. Site planning B. Gateways C. Views and focal pointss D. Architecture E. Landscaping F. Streets, sidewalks, and streetscape G. Signs H. Lighting I. Urban Center A. Site Planning Summary: Site planning is the art and science of arranging structures, open space, and non-structural elements on land in a functional way so that the purpose ofthe development can be met, while the keeping those elements are-in harmony with each other and with the context of the project. Revised Objective bfJ-QCD-D: New neighborhood development patterns should be consistent with Renton's established neighborhoods and have an interconnected road network. Revised Policy LV 79CD-15. Land should be subdivided into blocks sized so that walking distances are minimized and convenient routes between destination points are available. Page 4 City of Renton Community Design Element 8-20-04 III. Established Neighborhoods New-Objective #CD-C: R:ePromote re-investment in and upgrade of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment of small, underutilized parcels, modification and alteration of older housing stock, and improvements to streets and sidewalks to increase property values. Revised Policy LV 102CD-9. Support modification of existing commercial and residential structures ! I and site improvements that implement the current land use policies as re-investment occurs in neighborhoods. Such modifications may consist .of parking lot design, landscaping renovation, new coordinated signage, and site plan/building alterations that update structures to contemporary standards. Revised Policy LV 77CD-IO. Sidewalks or walking paths should be provided along streets in ' I established neighborhoods, where sidewalks have not been previously constructed. Sidewalk width should be ample to safely and comfortably accommodate pedestrian traffic and, where practical, match existing sidewalks. Revised Policy-LV 287CD-ll. Vacant property should be maintained (landscaped, pruned, mowed, and litter removed) or screened to prevent adverse visual, economic, and health/safety impacts on the surrounding area. New-Policy w-#CD-12. Infill development, defined as new short plats of nine or fewer lots, should be encouraged in order to add variety, updated housing stock, and new residential vitality to neighborhoods. Revised Policy W-#CD-13. Infill development should be reflective of the existing character of established neighborhoods even when designed using different architectural styles, and lor responding to more urban setbacks, height or lot requirements.' Infill development should draw on elements of existing development such as placement of structures ... and-vegetation, garage location, and location of entries and walkways ... to reflect the site planning and scale of existing areas. Revised Policy LV 81 CD-14. Architecture of structures in established areas should be visually compatible with other structures on the site and with adjacent development. , Visual compatibility should be evaluated using the following criteria: a. Where there are differences in height (e.g., new two-story development adjacent to single-story structures), the architecture of the new structure should include details and elements of design such as window treatment, roof type, entries, or porches that reduce the visual mass ofthe structure. Page 3 City of Renton Community DesigTI Eleluent 8-20-04 '.' <.. . New-Policy CD-2:,Du'ri~g' development, effort should be made to preserve water courses as open channels',:>;}r~ ;~."~}( Revised Policy LU'270CD-3: Site design should maximize public access to and create opportunities for use of shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a lake, river, stream, or wetland where such access would not jeopardize habitats and other environmental attributes of the water body. New-PolicYf-CD-4 Development review of proposed projects should identify opportunities for· increasing public access to Lake Washington, the Cedar River, wetlands, streams, and creeks in the City. New-Policy CD-5: Renton's public and private open space should be increased in size through acquisition of additional land or dedication of Native Growth Protection Area easements. Publio open space acquisition should beconsistent '.vith the Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan Policy. (parks Element Policy #43.) Policy CD-6: Public open space acquisition should be consistent with the Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Plan Policy. II. Urban Separators Summary: [Revised Comprehensive Plan Discussion] Urban Separators are low-density residential areas, intended to establish edges between Renton and other communities. These transition areas will become more important as urbari areas intensify, both within the City and outside of the urban grovith area. In many casessome areas, natural features such as water bodies and stream courses, landform, and vegetation already serve as buffers. These policies are implemented by the Resource Conservation and Residential 1 zoning designations. The Urban Separator policies should be considered along with Residential Low Density policies. Objective LV PPCD-B: Designate low-density residential and resource areas as urban separators to . . provide physical and visual distinctions between Renton and adjacent communities, and to define Renton's boundaries. Re'lised Policy LV 271CD-7. The function of Urban Separators should be to: a.' reinforce the character of the City, b. establish clear boundaries between the City and other communities, c. separate high-density urban land uses from low-density uses andresource lands, and d. protect environmentally sensitive or critical areas. ReYised Policy LV 272CD-S. Locational criteria should consider the following types of lands for designation as Urban Separators: a. Individual and interconnecting natural features, critical areas, public and private open space and water features; . b. Existing and proposed individual and interconnecting parks, and agricultural areas. c. Areas that provide a logical and easily identifiable physical separation between urban communities Page 2 ., CITY OF RENTON COMMUNITY DESh.71~ ELEMENT 8-20-04 NOTE: COMMUNITY DESIGN ELEMENT IS NEW TO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMMUNITY, DESIGN ELEMENT Purpose Statement: The purpose of the Community Design Element is to establish policies that set standards for high quality development, improve the aesthetics and functionality of existing neighborhoods and commercial areas, and guide the development of new neighborhoods. Recognizing that the ffigh-exceptional quality of life in Renton is dependent upon a strong local , I economy, these policies are intended to further that economic health. They are based on the belief that a positive image and high quality attracts more of the same, so that high standards can lead to increased revenue. Goals: 1. To raise the aesthetic quality of the City, 2. To strengthen the economy through high quality development, and 3. To ensure that a high quality oflife is maintained as Renton evolves. Discussion: The objectives and policies adopted to meet these goals address issues related to both the natural and built environment such as: how the physical organization of development can create a desirable place to live; the importance of view protection; ways to improve the streetscape; principles of vegetation preservation, selection, and maintenance; principles of architectural and urban design; and the function of community separators. I. Natural Areas Summary: Natural areas are an important component of the community. The purpose ofinc1uding natural areas in the Community Design Element is not so that natural areas will be "designed," but rather so that the built environment can be shaped in a manner that takes into consideration the natural environment. The Community Design Natural Areas objectives are intended to address: • Urban growth in relation to natural areas, • Protection and enhancement of natural areas, and • Public access to natural areas. Objective CD-l-A: The City's unique natural features, including land form, vegetation, lakeshore, river, creeks and streams, and wetlands should be protected and enhanced as opportunities arise. New-Policy CD-I: Incorporate Integrate development into natural areas by clustering development and/or adjusting site plans to integrate preserveEi, wetlands, steep slopes, and notable stands oftrees or other vegetation. Natural features should function as site amenities. Use incentives such as flexible lot size and configuration to encourage preservation, and add ameni~y value. H :\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAF1IHD·Community Design (04)-leg.docLast printed : 8/25/2004 12: 19 PM : I Policy LU-4S1. Changes from one zone to another should be considered to achieve a balance of uses that substantially improves the City's economic / employment base. Factors such as increasing the City's tax base, improving efficiency in the use of the land, and the ability of a proposed land use to mitigate potential adverse land use impacts should be considered. Policy LU-4S2. Commercial Arterial (CA) should be supported only when the proposed commercial use has access to SW 43rd Street, andlor East Valley Road south of SW 27th Street or is located north ofI-405 and south of 10th Avenue SW and the area under consideration is part of a designation totaling over 5 acres (acreage may be in separate ownerships). Policy LU-4S3. Zoning supporting industrial uses should be established when a mix or wider range of uses is not yet appropriate for a site. Policy LU-4S4. Properties lying between SR-167 and East Valley Road from SW 22nd Street to SW 41st Street should not be granted an industrial zone classification that is more intensive than Light Industrial in order to avoid the potential for degradation of the high visibility SR 167 corridor. Policy LU-4SS. Commercial Office zoning should be supported where a site has high visibility, particularly in those portions of the Valley that are gateways andlor along the I- 405 and SR 167 corridors, where larger sites can accommodate more intensive uses, and where sites can take advantage of existing andlor future multi-modal transportation opportunities. Objective LU-CCCC: Ensure quality development in Employment Area-Valley Policy LU-4S6. Street trees and landscaping should be required for new development within the Valley to provide an attractive streetscape in areas subjected to a transition of land uses (Refer to the Community Design Element). Policy LU-4S7. Vehicular connections between adjacent parking areas are encouraged. Incentives should be offered to encourage shared parking. Policy LU-4S8. Site design for office uses and conu'nercial, and mixed-use developments should consider ways of improving transit ridership through siting, locating of pedestrian amenities, walkways, parking, etc. Policy LU-4S9. Site plan review should be required for all new projects in the Employment Area-Valley pursuant to thresholds established in the City's development regulations. Policy LU-460. New development, or site redevelopment, should conform to development standards that include scale of building, building fayade treatment to reduce perception of bulk, relationship between buildings, and landscaping. 66 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFTlhd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM low traffic volumes. As the City becomes: more urban, they need assurance that incompatible uses will not be allowed that could eventually force them to relocate. Other uses, especially residential, also want to ~nsure that industries do not impact their neighborhoods with noise, traffic, and other nuisances and hazards. For these reasons, although neighborhoods may see more diversity and mixing of uses, industrial areas will remain somewhat isolated from other uses. EMPLOYMENT AREA-VALLEY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Objective LU-AAAA: Provide for a mix of employment-based uses, including commercial, office, and industrial dev~lopment to support the economic development of the City of Renton. Policy LU-44S. Develop the Green River Valley ("The Valley") and the Black River Valley (located between Sunset Blvd and SW Grady Way) areas as places for a range and variety of commercial, office, and industrial. Policy LU-446. Non-employment-based uses, such as residential, are prohibited in the Employment Area Valley. Policy LU-447. Multi-story office uses ~hould be located in areas most likely to be served by future multi-modal transportation opportunities. A greater emphasis on public amenities is appropriate for this type of use. Policy LU-448. Developments should be encouraged to achieve greater efficiency in site utilization and result in benefits to users with techniques including: 1) Shared facilities such as parking and site access, recreation facilities and amenities; 2) An improved ability to serve development with transit by centralizing transit stops; and 3) An opportunity to provide support services (e.g. copy center, coffee shop or lunch facilities, express mail services) for nearby development that otherwise might not exist. Policy LU-449. Uses such as research, design, and development facilities should be allowed in office designations and indus,trial designations when potential adverse impacts to surrounding uses can be mitigated. Policy LU-4S0. Recognize viable existing and allow new industrial uses in the Valley, while promoting the gradual transition of uses on sites with good access and visibility to more intensive commercial and office use. Objective LU-BBBB: Provide flexibility in the reguJatory processes by allowing a variety of zoning designations in the Employment Area-Valley designation. 65 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFlIhd-Land Use.docLast printed 812512004 II :55 AM Policy LU-436. Site planning review should ensure that light industrial uses are neither intrusive nor adversely affected by other uses nearby. EMPLOYMENT AREA-INDUSTRIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Objective LU-ZZZ: Sustain industrial areas that function as integrated employment activity areas and include a core of industrial uses and other related businesses and services, transit facilities, and amenities. Policy LU-437. The primary use in the Employment Area -Industrial designation should be industrial. Policy LU-438. A mix of offices, light industrial, warehousing, and manufacturing should be encouraged in the Employment Area-Industrial classification, with conditions as appropriate. Policy LU-439. Industrial uses with a synergistic relationship should be encouraged to locate in close proximity to one another. Policy LU-440. Industrial parks that provide space for several related or unrelated, but compatible users should be encouraged to: 1) Include more than one industrial use organized into a single development; 2) Share facilities such as parking, transit facilities, recreation facilities, and amenities; 3) Include properties in more than one ownership; 4) Locate in areas with adequate regional access to minimize their impacts on the local street network; and 5) Organize the site plan to place building fronts to the street with service and parking . screened from the front. Policy LU-441. Existing industrial activities may create noise, chemicals, odors, or other potentially noxious off-site impacts. Within the Employment Area-Industrial designation existing industrial activities should be protected. Although the designation allows a wide range and mix of uses, new businesses that would be impacted by pre-existing industrial activities should be discouraged. Policy LU-442. When more intensive new uses are proposed for locations in close proximity to less intensive existing uses, the responsibility for mitigating any adverse impacts should be the responsibility of the new use. Policy LU-443. Off-site impacts from industrial development such as noise, odors, light and glare, surface and ground water pollution, and air quality should be controlled through setbacks, landscaping, screening and/or fencing, drainage controls, environmental mitigation, and other techniques. Policy LU-444. Light industrial uses that result in noise or odors, should be located in the Employment Area-Industrial designation. Discussion: Although location is an important factor for all types of development, it is especially critical for industrial development. Industries need good access in areas with 64 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARJNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM XI. EMPLOYMENT AREAS Goal: Achieve a mix of land uses including industrial, high technology, office, and commercial activities in Employment Areas that lead to economic growth and a strengthening of Renton's employment base. Discussion: These policies are designed to ensure that Renton will have adequate reserves of land and appropriate use designations to further its economic development efforts. Adequate land is necessary to attract new businesses in an effort to expand and diversify, and stabilize the employment base. There are two Employment Area Land Use Designations: 1) Employment Area -Industrial 2) Employment Area -Valley Flexibility is encouraged in the Employment Areas by allowing a range of uses and multiple users on sites. Research and development businesses may need to evolve into production and distribution facilities as products are developed and receive approval for marketing. A flexible approach can facilitate business development and stimulate creation of nodes of employment activity supported by commercial and service uses. Objective LU-XXX: Encourage economic growth resulting in greater diversity and stability in the employment and tax bases by providing adequate land capacity through zoning amounts of land to meet the needs of future employers. Policy LU-431. The City should endeavor to expand its present economic base, emphasizing new technologies, research and development facilities, science parks, and high-technology centers, and supporting commercial and office land uses. Policy LU-432. In each employment designation, an appropriate mix of commercial, office, light industrial, and industrial uses should be supported. The mix will vary depending on the employment area emphasis. Policy L U-433. Encourage flexibility in use and reuse of existing, conforming structures to allow business to evolve in response to market and production requirements. Policy LU-434. Support location of commercial and service uses in proximity to office or industrial uses to develop nodes of employment supported by services. Objective LU-435: Promote the development of low impact, light industrial uses, particularly those within the high-technology category, in Employment Area-Valley and Employment Area-Industrial designations where potentially adverse impacts can be mitigated. 63 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/2512004 II :55 AM Policy LU-430. Commercial structures in Neighborhood Commercial designated areas should be compatible with nearby residential areas in height, front yard setbacks, lot coverage, building design, and use. 62 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM . NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The purpose of Neighborhood Commercial designation is to provide small scale, low-intensity commercial areas located within neighborhoods primarily for the convenience of residents who live nearby. Uses should be those that provide goods and services. In addition, a limited amount of residential opportunities should be provided. Objective LU-WWW: Neighborhood Commercial designated areas are intended to reduce traffic volumes, permit small-scale business uses, such as commercial/retail, professional office, and services that serve the personal needs of the immediate population in surrounding neighborhoods. , Policy LU-422. The Neighborhood Commercial designation should be implemented by Neighborhood Commercial zoning. Policy LU-423. Neighborhood Commercial designated areas should be located: 1) Within one-quarter mile of existing and planned residential areas; 2) To the extent possible, outside ofthe trade areas of other small-scale commercial uses offering comparable goods and services; and 3) Contiguous to a street no smaller than those classified at the collector level. Policy LU-424. Neighborhood Commercial designated areas should not increase in scale or size to the point of changing the character of the nearby residential neighborhood. Policy LU-42S. The small-scale uses of Neighborhood Commercial designated areas should not increase in intensity so that the character of the commercial area or that of the nearby residential area is changed. Policy LU-426. A mix of uses (e.g. convenience retail, consumer services, offices, residential) should be encouraged in small-scale commercial developments within Neighborhood Commercial designated areas. Policy LU-427. Neighborhood Commercial designated areas should consist primarily of retail and/or service uses. Policy LU-428. Products and services related to large-scale motorized machinery, vehicles, or equipment should not be allowed in Neighborhood Commercial designated areas. Nor should uses that result in emissions, noise, or other potential nuisance conditions be allowed in such areas. Policy LU-429. Residential uses should be located above the ground floor, limited to no more than four units per structure and should be secondary to retail and services uses. 61 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM I) Public plazas; 2) Prominent architectural features; 3) Public access to natural features or views; 4) Distinctive focal features; 5) Indication of the function as a gateway, if appropriate; 6) Structured parking; and 7) Other features meeting the spirit and intent of the COR designation. 60 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 812512004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-411. Individual properties may have a single use if they can be developed at the scale and inteJ?sity envisioned for the designation CommerciallOfficelResidential project, or if proposed as part of a phased development and multi-parcel proposal that includes a mix of uses. , Policy LU-412. Structured parking should be required. Iflack of financial feasibility can be demonstrated at the time of the COR development, phased structured parking should be accommodated in the proposed master plan. Policy LU-413. Sites that have significant limitations on redevelopment due to environmental, access, and/or land assembly constraints should be granted flexibility of use combinations and development standards through the master plan process. Policy LU-414. Private/public partnerships should be encouraged to provide infrastructure development, transportation facilities, public uses, and amenities. Policy LU-41S. Adjacent properties within a designated COR should be combined for master planning purposes and public review regardless of ownership. Policy LU-416. Master plans should coordinate the mix and compatibility of uses, residential density, conceptual building; site and landscape design, identification of gateway features, signs, circulation, transit opportunities, and phasing regardless of ownership of individual parcels. Policy LU-417. Maximum residential density at COR designated sites should range between 30 to 50 dwelling units per acre. The same area used for commercial and office development may also be used to calculate residential density. Policy LU-418. CommerciallOfficelResidential master plans should be guided by design criteria specific to the location, context, and scale of the designated COR. COR Design Guidelines should fully integrate signage, building height, bulk, setbacks, landscaping, and parking considerations for the various components of each proposed project within the COR development. Policy LU-419. Internally, CommerciallOfficelResidential developments should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Internal site circulation of vehicles should be separated from pedestrians wherever feasible by dedicated walkways. Policy LU-420. Primary vehicular access to COR development should be from principal arterials. Internal streets should be sized hierarchically. Curb cuts should not conflict with pedestrian routes, if possible. Policy LU-421. CommerciallOfficelResidential developments should have a combination of internal and external site design features, such as: 59 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/2512004 II :55 AM ' COMMERCIAVOFFICE/RESIDENTIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) designation provides opportunities for large-scale office, commercial retail and mu It i-fa m ily projects developed through a master plan and site plan process incorporation significant site amenities and/or gateway features. COR sites are typically transitions from an industrial use to a more intensive land use. The sites offer redevelopment opportunities on Lake Washington and/or the Cedar River. Objective LU-VVV: Development at CommerciallOfficelResidential designations should be cohesive, high quality, landmark development that are integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to create a compact, urban development with high amenity values that creates a prominent identity. Policy LU-406. Designate CommerciallOfficelResidential in locations meeting the following criteria: I) There is the potential for redevelopment, or a sufficient amount of vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 2) The COR site could function as a gateway to the City; 3) COR sites should be located on major transit and transportation routes; and 4) The COR location has significant amenity value, such as water access, that can support landmark development. Policy LU-407. Consistent with the locational criteria, CommerciallOfficelResidential designations may be placed on property adjacent to, or abutting, residential, commercial industrial designations or publicly owned properties. COR designations next to higher intensity zones such as industrial, or next to public uses, may provide a transition to less intense designations in the vicinity. Site design of COR should consider the long-term retention of adjacent or abutting industrial or public uses. Policy LU-40S. Uses in CommerciallOfficelResidential designations should include mixed-use complexes consisting of office, and/or residential uses, cultural facilities, hotel and convention center type development, technology research and development facilities; and corporate headquarters. Policy LU .. 409. Commercial uses such as retail and services should support the primary uses of the site and be architecturally and functionally integrated into the development. Policy LU-410. Commercial development, excluding big-box, may be a primary use in a CommerciallOfficelResidential designation, if: 1) It provides significant economic value to the City; 2) It is sited in conjunction with small-scale, multiple businesses in a "business district;" 3) It is designed with the scale and intensity envisioned for the COR; and 4) It is part of a proposed master plan development. 58 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM Objective LU-TTT: The Rainier Aveliue Business Corridor District should be enhanced to improve efficiency, safety. and attractiveness to both potential shoppers and pedestrians using the public transportation system. Policy LU-399. In the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor, due to significant pedestrian use of the intersections of Rainier Avenue and Sunset Boulevard/South Third Street, Rainier Avenue and South Third Place, and Rainier Avenue and South Fourth Street, sidewalk widths at these locations should be increased to create pedestrian comers whenever redevelopment occurs. Pavement should be increased for added pedestrian safety. Policy LU-400. On comers having high-volume pedestrian traffic, the paved sidewalk area should be increased in size. This may require a larger building setback at the comers of buildings when building facades abut the sidewalk. Policy LU-401. Pedestrian comers should include urban street furniture such as a bench or benches, information kiosk, and trash receptacle. Policy LU-402. Rainier Avenue should be improved with landscaped median and additional street trees to improve safety and appearance. Policy LU-403. Property owners and business owners should be encouraged to provide awnings or other weather protection on facades of buildings fronting sidewalks. Objective LU-UUU: The Rainier Avenue Business Corridor District is one ofthe busiest arterials in the City and is located as a gateway to the City from both the south and north. The design, function, and configuration of the District should reflect its status as a key gateway. Policy LU-404. The Rainier Avenue Business Corridor District should feature gateway elements to the extent made possible by redevelopment ofthe District. Policy LU-40S. Signage in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor District should include high quality City directional signs to the Urban Center, City Hall, IKEA Performing Arts Center, Piazza Park, City parking garage, library, museum, and other prominent civic destinations. 57 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 812512004 II :55 AM • I Policy LU-392. In the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor District, where buildings are set back more than fifteen (15) feet from the principal arterial, new development or redevelopment should: 1. Contribute a furnished public gathering space, abutting the sidewalk along the principal arterial, of no less than 1,000 square feet with a minimum dimension of twenty (20) feet on one side. Such space should have landscaping, including street trees, decorative paving, pedestrian-scaled lighting and seating, at a minimum. 2. Designate appropriate site(s) for future pad development for additional commercial structures located to conform to maximum setback requirements. Rainier Avenue Business Corridor Objective LU-RRR: A special district should be designated along Rainier Avenue. The purpose of this district would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. The Rainier Avenue Business Corridor is one ofthe most commercially viable areas of the City. Redevelopment of infrastructure and businesses in the Rainier Corridor would present the opportunity to strengthen the transition between the, Corridor, a major transportation route through the west part of the City, and the Urban Center. Changes of this nature could increase the economic vitality of Renton's Downtown. Policy LU-393. The Rainier Avenue Business Corridor should be bounded by properties directly north of S. 2nd Street on the north and the Houser railroad trestle on the south where it abuts the Auto Mall District. ' Policy LU-394. The policies of the Corridor Commercial designation and the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor District should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Policy LU-39S. Uses in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor should be primarily retail-oriented, and may have an emphasis on providing goods on a high-volume, vehicle- accessed basis, but should also provide high-quality and 'specialty goods. Objective LU-SSS: Due to the nature of the retail core business in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor, vehicular access and egress safety should be a primary consideration. Policy L U-396. In the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor access points to businesses fronting the principal arterial should be consolidated if at all possible and curb cuts reduced wherever feasible. Policy LU-397. Business signs in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor should be uniform in size, content, and location to reduce visual clutter. Monument signs are the preferred type. Policy LU-398. Billboard signs should be removed from the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor District due to the large scale of the signs in relation to the scale of the district. 56 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-38S. The policies of the Corridor Commercial designation and the Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zonmg . . Policy LU-386. Vehicle sales businesses existing in the Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor should be encouraged to relocate to the Renton Auto Mall District. Northeast Fourth Business Corridor : Objective LU-PPP: A special district should be designated along Northeast Fourth Street. The purpose of this district would be to enhance the commercial environment to increase revenue of local businesses and the City's tax base. The Northeast Fourth Business Corridor is an active commercial area located at a gateway to the City. It features a wide variety of retail and service uses and several different structural forms from small professional offices to large-scale strip malls with major grocery anchors. Annexations of land into the City to the·east of this commercial area and subsequent development of large single family hou~ing projects has increased the market area for the Northeast Fourth Corridor considerably in recent years. Policy LU-387. The Northeast Fourth Business Corridor should be bounded NE 3rd Street and Monroe Ave. N.E. (on the Wyst) and NE 4th Street to east of Duvall Ave N.E. (on the east). . Policy LU-388. The policies of the Comdor Commercial designation and the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor District shoul~ be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zomng. Objective LU-QQQ: The Northeast .fourth Business Corridor District should be enhanced to improve efficiency, safety and attractiveness to both potential shoppers and pass-through traffic. Policy LU-389. Due to its location at ~ key entrance to the City from the east, the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor should include gateway features. Policy LU-390. The Northeast Fourth Business Corridor should be enhanced with boulevard design features such as landscaped center of road medians for the purpose of improving safety through traffic control and slowing traffic for pedestrian safety and improved conditions for vehicles leaving and entering the principal arterial. Policy LU-391. To the extent possible~ undeveloped parcels and pads and/or redevelopment in the Northeast Fourth Business Corridor District should feature street- facing building facades located a maximum of fifteen (15) feet set back from the non- curb edge of sidewalks abutting the principal arterial. 55 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-377. On-site landscaping should consist of a minimum two and one half percent (2.5%) of the gross site area. Policy LU-378. On-site landscaping should primarily be located at site entries, in front of buildings, and at other locations with high visibility from public areas. Policy LU-379. Vehicle service areas should not be readily visible from public rights-of- way. Objective LU-NNN: Use of the Auto Mall District by pedestrians should be encouraged by improving safety and creating an attractive, "walkable" business environment. Policy L U-380. Designated walkways should be part of a larger network of pedestrian connections between businesses throughout the district. Policy LU-381. To enhance use of the Auto Mall Improvement District by pedestrians the following features should be used: • Wheel stops or curbs placed to prevent overhang of sidewalks by vehicle bumpers. • Customer parking located and clearly marked near site entries. • Coordinated dealer-to-dealer signage should be developed. Sunset Boulevard Corridor Objective L U-OOO: A special district should be designated along NE Sunset Boulevard. The purpose of this district would be to make the commercial environment more attractive to local and sub-regional shoppers so that local businesses will be more economically viable and the City's tax base will increase. The Sunset Boulevard Corridor is unique in the City due to the highly eclectic mix of commercial and residential uses along its length. These integrated uses, located at a "gateway" to the City, are an appropriate signal to those entering Renton that the community is diverse in many ways. Height limitations in the Development Standards have kept buildings along the Sunset Boulevard Corridor at two stories or below, a scale that is generally consistent with the various forms of residential along the corridor. Policy LU-382. The Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor should include the commercial properties along NE Sunset Blvd. from east of Duvall Ave. N.E. to west of Union Ave. N.E. Policy LU-383. The Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor, due to its location on the east boundary of the City, should include City gateway features. Policy LU-384. The Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor, due to its location abutting Highlands Neighborhood Center, should be considered a gateway to that district and feature design elements that are coordinated with, and reflect the nature of the Highlands Neighborhood Center. 54 H;\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM . . Renton Auto Mall Objective LU-KKK: Provide support for a cohesive Corridor Commercial District specifically for the concentration of auto-and vehicular-related businesses in order to increase their revenue and the sales tax base for the City. The Renton Auto Mall is intended to serve several purposes on behalf of the City and business community. It increases vehicle sales and corresponding tax revenue returned to the City. It has special development standards that are predictable, cohesive, and uniform throughout the District. It is easily accessible from regional interstate transportation systems, and improves and increases values of underdeveloped property. The Auto Mall, by providing a District for this concentrated activity, allows land that might otherwise be used for vehicle sales and service to be reutilized more efficiently in other Districts, such as the Urban Center. Additional benefits may accrue to both City residents and people on a regional basis due to the opportunity to comparison shop and conveniently participate in activities related to auto sales and service. Policy LU-371. The Renton Auto Mall should be primarily located along SW Grady Way, between Oakesdale Ave. S.W. an~ Williams Ave. S., but may be expanded beyond this area as warranted. Policy LU-372. The objectives and policies ofthe Comdor Commercial designation should be implemented by Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. Objective LU-LLL: In order to furt~er the continued cohesiveness of the Auto Mall Improvement District, a right-of-way improvement plan should be completed, adopted, and implemented by the City in coordination with property owners and auto dealers. Policy LU-373. The coordinated right:-of-way improvement plan should address area gateways, signage, landscaping, circulation, and shared access. Policy LU-374. A designated gateway to the Auto Mall District should be made visually distinctive through the use of gateway features. Policy LU-37S. In order to facilitate the consolidation of land into a cohesive district, fees and other compensation normally levied for street right-of-way vacation should be waived. Objective LU-MMM: Auto Mall Improvement District development standards, site planning, and project review should. further the goal of the City to present an attractive environment for doing regional-scale, auto-related business. Policy LU-376. Landscaping along principal arterials should be uniform from parcel to parcel in order to further the visual cohesiveness of the District. 53 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11:55 AM Policy LU-359. Support routing of the citywide transit system to Corridor Commercial areas to provide greater access. Policy LU-360. Encourage development proponents to work with the City Transportation Division, King County METRO, and Sound Transit in order to site transit stops within the Corridor Commercial areas. Policy LU-361. Public transportation transit stops located in Corridor Commercial areas should be safe, clean, comfortable, and attractive. Objective LU-III: Ensure quality development in Commercial Office zones. Policy LU-362. Office sites and structures should be designed (e.g. signage; building height, bulk and setback; landscaping; parking) to mitigate adverse impacts on adjacent land uses. Policy LU-363. Parking provided on-site, in parking structures, and either buffered from adjacent uses or incorporated into pedestrian-oriented street design, is preferred. Policy LU-364. In areas developed with high intensity office uses, circulation within the site should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Policy LU-365. In areas developed with high intensity office uses, vehicular access to the site should be from the primary street with the access points minimized and designed to ease entrance and exit. Policy LU-366. Public amenity features (e.g. parks, plazas, recreation areas), should be encouraged (i.e. through incentives or similar means) as part of every high-intensity office development. Policy LU-367. In areas developed with high intensity office uses, site and building design should be transit-, people-, and pedestrian-oriented. Ground floor uses and design should be pedestrian-oriented. Objective LU-JJJ: Where Corridor Commercial areas intersect other land use designations, recognition of a transition and/or buffer between uses should be incorporated into redevelopment plans. Policy LU-368. Consideration of the scale and building style of near-by residential neighborhoods should be included in development proposals. Policy LU-369. Development should be designed to consider potential adverse impacts on adjacent, less intensive uses, e.g. lighting, landscaping, and setbacks should all be considered during site design. Policy LU-370. Landscape buffers, additional setbacks, reduced height, and screening devices such as berms and fencing should be employed to reduce impacts (e.g. visual, noise, odor, light) on adjacent, less intensive uses. 52 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/2512004 11:55 AM ' Policy LU-349. Support development plans incorporating the following features: 1) Shared access points and fewer curb cuts; 2) Internal circulation among adjacent parcels; 3) Shared parking facilities; I 4) Allowance for future transition to structured parking facilities; 5) Centralized signage; ; 6) Unified development concepts; and 7) Landscaping and streetscape that softens visual impacts. I Policy LU-350. New development in Corridor Commercial designated areas should be encouraged to implement unifonn site standards, including: 1) Minimum lot depth of 200 feet; 2) Maximum height often (10) stories;~ 3) Parking preferably at the rear ofthe building, or on the side as a second choice; 4) Setbacks that would allow incorporating a landscape buffer; 5) Front setback without frontage street or driveway between building and sidewalk; and 6) Common signage and lighting system. Policy LU-351. Identify and map activity nodes located along principal arterials that are the foundation of the Corridors, and guide the development or redevelopment of these nodes as activity areas for the larger corridors so that they enhance their function. Policy LU-352. Development within dyfined activity nodes should be subject to additional design guidelines as delineated in the development standards. Policy LU-353. Structures at Corridor Commercial intersections should not be set back from the street and sidewalk so as to allow vehicular circulation or parking to be located between the sidewalk and the building. Policy LU-354. Corridor Commercial Intersections frequented by pedestrians, due to the nature of nearby uses or transit stops, should feature sidewalk pavement increased to fonn pedestrian corners and include pedestrian amenities, signage, and special design treatment that would make them identifiable as activity areas for the larger corridor. Policy LU-35S. Parking at designated intersections should be in back of structures and not located between structures and the sidewalk or street. Policy LU-356. Structures in Corridor 'Commercial areas that front sidewalks abutting the principle arterial or are located at activity nodes should be eligible for a height bonus and therefore may exceed the maximum allowable height in the district. Policy LU-3S7. Public amenity features (e.g. plazas, recreation areas should be encouraged as part of new development or redevelopment. Policy LU-358. Parking areas should be landscaped (including street trees, buffers, berms), especially along roadways, to reduce visual impacts. I Objective LU-HHH: Support methods of increasing accessibility to Corridor Commercial areas for both automobile and transit to support the land use objectives of the district. 51 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-339. Areas of the City identified for intensive office use may be mapped with Commercial Office implementing zoning when site is developed, historically used for office, or the site meets the following criteria: 1) Site is located contiguous to an existing or planned transit route; 2) Large parcel size; 3) High visibility; and 4) Opportunities for views. Policy LU-340. Small-scale medical uses associated with major institutions should be located in the portions of Corridor Commercial designated areas with Commercial Office zoning, in the Urban Center, or in the Employment Area -Valley. Policy LU-341. Retirement centers that have a medical facility as a component ofthe services offered should be located in areas of the Corridor Commercial that have Commercial Office zoning. Policy LU-342. Medium and high intensity office should be encouraged as the primary use in Commercial Office zoned areas. Policy LU-343. Retail and services should support the primary office use in areas identified for Commercial Office zoning, and should be located on the ground floor of office and parking structures. Policy LU-344. In the Commercial Office zone, high-rise office development should be limited to ten (10) stories. Fifteen (15) stories may be obtained through a height bonus system. Policy LU-34S. Height bonuses of five (5) stories maybe allowed for office buildings in designated areas of the Commercial Office zone, under appropriate conditions, where sites provide additioI,lal public benefits such as plazas, parks, exceptional landscaping, andlor public art. Objective LU-FFF: Guide redevelopment of land in the Corridor Commercial designation with Commercial Arterial zoning, from the existing strip commercial urban forms into more concentrated forms, in which structures and parking evolve from the existing suburban form, to more efficient urban configurations with cohesive site planning. Policy LU-346. Support the redevelopment of commercial business districts located along principal arterials in the City. Policy LU-347. Implement development standards that encourage lively, attractive, medium to high-density commercial areas. Policy LU-348. Encourage consolidation of individual parcels to maximize flexibility of site design and reduce access points. 50 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast . printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM ' 4) Uses dependent upon or benefiting from high-volume traffic; 5) Uses that provide significant employment; and 6) Businesses that provide necessary or desirable goods and services to the larger community. Policy LU-333. The Corridor Commercial Land Use designation should be mapped in areas with the following characteristics: • 1) Located on, and having access to, streets classified as principle arterials; 2) High traffic volumes; or 3) Land use pattern characterized by strip commercial development, shopping centers, or office parks. Policy LU-334. The Corridor Commercial designation should be implemented through Commercial Arterial or Commercial Office zoning. Policy LU-335. Increased demand for c'ommercial uses should be accommodated primarily through redevelopment and intensification of existing business area designations rather than expansion of th?se areas. Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for development and re-development of land in portions of the Corridor Commercial designation for general business and service uses. These include a wide range of restaurant, small-scale to big-box retail, offices, auto dealers, light industrial, ~nd residential uses. Policy LU-336. Portions ofthe Corridor Commercial designation appropriate for a wide range of uses catering to low and medium intensity office, service, and retail uses should be mapped with Commercial Arterial zoning. Policy LU-337. Areas that should be considered for Commercial Arterial zoning should meet the following criteria: 1) The corridor is served by transit or ~as transit within one-quarter mile; 2) A historical strip commercial urban development pattern predominates; 3) Large, surface parking lots exist; 4) Primary development on the site is located at rear portions of the property with parking in front of the buildings; 5) Parcel size and configuration typically is defined by a larger parcel fronting the arterial street with multiple buildings and businesses; and 6) The corridor exhibits long block lengths and/or an incomplete grid street network. Policy LU-338. Commercial Arterial zoned areas should include an opportunity for residential uses and office as part of mixed-use development. Objective LU-EEE: Create opportunities for intensive office uses in portions of Corridor Commercial designations including a wide range of business, financial, and professional services supported by service and commercial/retail activities. 49 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM x. COMMERCIAL Goal (New): Support existing businesses and provide an energetic business environment for new commercial activity providing a range of service, office, commercial, and mixed use residential uses that enhance the City's employment and tax base along arterial boulevards and in designated development areas. Discussion: There are three commercial designations: 1) Corridor Commercial; 2) Commercial/Office/Residential; and 3) Neighborhood Commercial. These commercial areas range from intense retail corridors to major office parks to neighborhood scale commercial. Many commercial areas are located along arterials where the high volumes of daily traffic provide a substantial customer base. CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Corridor Commercial district is characterized by concentrated, pre- existing commercial activity, primarily in a linear urban form, that provides necessary goods and services for daily living, accessible to near-by neighborhoods, serving a sub- regional market and accommodating large volumes of traffic. It is the intention of City objectives and policies that Corridor Commercial areas evolve from "strip commercial" linear business districts to business areas characterized by enhanced site planning incorporating efficient parking lot design, coordinated access, amenities, and boulevard treatment. Corridor Commercial areas may include designated districts including concentrations of specialized uses such as the Auto Mall, or features such as transit stops and a combination of businesses creating a focal point of pedestrian activity and visual interest. Corridor Commercial areas are characterized by medium intensity levels of activity. It is anticipated, however, that intensity levels in these areas will increase over time as development of vacant space occurs, increased land value makes redevelopment feasible, and land is used more efficiently. In these districts, provision of pedestrian amenities is encouraged, as are opportunities to link adjacent uses and neighborhoods. Objective LU-DDD: The Corridor Commercial land use designation should include: 1) Established commercial and office areas; 2) Developments located on large parcels of land; 3) Projects that may be highly visible from principal arterials; 48 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8125/2004 11:55 AM Policy LU-318. Implement the Center Village Designation using multiple zoning designations including R-IO, CS, and RM-C. Strategy 319.1. Evaluate commercial and residential development standards in the Center Village and replace zoning designations or re-zone with the vision for a Center Village designation Strategy 319.2. Prepare a Highlands Plan as a sub-area plan to further refine the land use concept for and implement the Center Village land use concepts. Phasing of the Highlands Redevelopment Plan is expected to occur over a 5-10 year period. Strategy 319.3. Areas east of Edmonds and north of Sunset currently zoned RM-C are to remain in residential use. The area north of lih St. currently zoned R-IO is to remain in residential use. . Policy LU-320. Allow residential density ranging from 10 to 60 dwelling units per acre in the Center Village Designation. Policy LU-321. Encourage mixed use structures and projects. Policy LU-322. Orient site and building design primarily toward pedestrians and people to maximize pedestrian activity and minimize automobile use for circulation within the Center Policy LU-323. Accommodate parking within a parking structure. Where structured parking is infeasible, parking should be located in the back or the side of the primary structure. Discourage parking lots between structures and street rights-of-way. Policy LU-324. Use alley access where alleys currently exists. Encourage designation of new alleys in redevelopment projects. Policy LU-32S. Encourage shared parking to use urban land efficiency. Policy LU-326. Develop design guidelines to provide direction on site design, building design, landscape treatments, and parking and circulation components of new development projects. Policy LU-327. Encourage uses in Center Villages that serve a sub-regional or citywide market as well as the surrounding neighborhoods. Policy LU-328. Encourage more urban style design and intensity of development (e.g. building height, bulk, landscaping, parking) within Center Villages than with land uses outside the Center. Policy LU-329. Promote the clustering of community commercial uses and discourage the development of strip commercial areas. Policy LU-330. Residential development within Center Villages is intended to be urban scale, stacked, flat andlor townhouse development with structured parking. Policy LU-331. Prohibit new garden style multi-family development. Policy LU-332. Provide community scale office and service uses. 47 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM support the redevelopment with a range and variety of commercial, office, research, and residential uses. I) Support a mid-to high-rise scale and intensity of development. 2) Support retail and service activities as ancillary uses that are synergistic with commercial, office, biotech, research, technology, and residential activities. Traditional retail (Main Street), general business and professional services, and general offices are examples of the types of uses that are supported in combination with other activities. 3) Support urban scale residential development in District Two. North ofN. 8th Street structured parking should be required. 4) Allow a limited range of service uses, such as churches, government offices and facilities, commercial parking garages, and day care centers through the conditional use process. 5) Allow eating and drinking establishments and cultural facilities as part of office or mixed-use development. 6) Prohibit new warehousing, storage including self-storage, vehicle sales, repair and display (including boats, cars, trucks and motorcycles), assembly and packaging operations, heavy and medium manufacturing and fabrication unrelated to production of new commercial airplanes. 7) Support development of public amenities such as public open space, schools, recreational and cultural facilities, and museums. 8) Allow commercial uses such as retail and services provided that they support the primary uses of the site and are architecturally and functionally integrated into the development. CENTER VILLAGE LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Center Village is characterized by areas of the City that provide an opportunity for redevelopment as close-in urban mixed-use residential and commercial areas that are pedestrian oriented. These areas are anticipated to provide medium to high-density residential development and a wide range of commercial activities serving citywide and sub-regional markets. Center Villages typically are developed within an existing suburban land use pattern where opportunities exist to modify the development pattern to accommodate more growth within the existing urban areas by providingfor compact urban development, transit orientation, pedestrian circulation, and a community focal point organized around an urban village concept. Objective LU-CCC: Develop Center Villages, characterized by intense urban development supported by site planning and infrastructure that provides a pedestrian scale environment. Policy LU-317. Apply the Center Village Designation to areas with an existing suburban and auto-oriented land use pattern which, due to availability and proximity to existing residential neighborhoods, are candidate locations for a higher density mixed-use type of development. 46 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM region-a premiere address for residents, a hub of economic activity providing capacity . for high-wage jobs and a world-class destination for shopping, dining, recreation, and entertainment Mixed-use projects will be high in design and construction quality, and offer landmark living, shopping, and working environm~nts planned to take advantage of a regionally centralized location, efficient access, mass transit, potential passenger ferry connections, stellar views of lake and mountains, and restored naturalenvironments along the Cedar River and Lake Washington shorelines. Development within District Two will be organized into neighborhoods with housing, shopping, employment, and recreation opportunities located within walking distance. Low-to mid-rise buildings will be located to the south while development to the north will be primarily mid-to-high-rise in order to maximize views. While some on-street or surface parking may occur, the majority of parking will be provided in the lower levels of mixed-use buildings or in stand-alone structures designed to blend in with the surrounding neighborhood. This environment attracts a residential population living in up-scale neighborhoods featuring higher-density condominium and apartment forms of housing north of N 8th St. Townhouse developments south ofN 8th St. provide a transition to the adjacent North Renton neighborhood in terms of scale and use of buildings. Residents of both neighborhoods will find ample shopping and employment opportunities in the immediate vicinity. i Residents, employees and visitors will enjoy new public open space. These range from public access to the lakefront through small parks, overviews, and trails, to large public plazas and central greens that provide gathering places, recreational opportunities, and a celebration of views of the Seattle skyline, the Olympic Mountains, and Mount Rainier District Two Policies Objective LU-AAA: Support ongoing airplane manufacturing and accessory uses. Policy LU-314. Support existing airplane manufacturing and accessory uses while allowing for the gradual transition to other uses should The Boeing Company surplus property within District Two. Policy LU-315. Allow airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses such as airplane sales and repair, laboratories for research, development and testing, medical institutions, and light industrial uses including small scale or less intensive production and manufacturing, and fabricating with accessory office and support services. Objective LU-BBB: If Boeing elects to surplus property in District Two, land uses will transition into an urban area characterized by high-quality development offering landmark living, shopping and work environments planned to take advantage of access and views to the adjacent river and shoreline. Policy LU-316. Should The Boeing Company elect to surplus properties in District Two 45 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/2512004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-304. Support urban forms of setback and buffering treatment such as: a) Street trees with sidewalk grates, b) Paving and sidewalk extensions or plazas, and c) Planters and street furniture. Policy LU-30S. Allow phasing plans for developments as part of the master plan and site plan review that: a) Provide a strategy for future infill or redevelopment with mixed-use buildings. b) Preserve opportunities for future structured parking and more intense emploYment-generating development. Policy LU-306. Support parking at-grade in surface parking lots only when structured or under-building parking is not market viable. Policy LU-307. Support development of parking structures using private/public partnerships when market will not support structural parking without subsidy. Policy L U-30S. Support surface parking lots behind buildings, and in the center of blocks, screened from the street by structures with landscape buffers. Policy LU-309. Consider public/private participation in provision of structured parking, to stimulate additional private investment and produce a more urban environment. Policy LU-310. Support shared parking by averaging parking ratios for co-located and mixed-uses. Policy LU-311. Reduce the suburban character of development, preserve opportunities for infill development, and provide for efficient use of land by setting maximum parking standards. Policy LU-312. Support the co-location of uses within a site and/or building in order to promote urban style mixed-use (commercial/retail/office/residential) development. Policy LU-313. Discourage ancillary retail pads. Vision -District Two Ongoing Boeing airplane manufacturing is supported to continue across District Two for the foreseeable future. This important industrial base will continue to provide high-wage jobs within the Urban Center -North as redevelopment occurs in District One .. Should Boeing surplus property west of Logan Avenue, redevelopment that follows will take on more urban characteristics, incorporating mixed-use (residential, office, and retail) development types. Planning for the redevelopment of District Two will take into consideration the unique issues involved in the transition of a site historically used for heavy industry adjacent to the Renton Municipal Airport. Redevelopment will be consistent with the City's Urban Center-North Airport Compatible Land Use Program. Eventually, redevelopment will lead to the creation of a vibrant new lakefront community providing additional housing, shopping, and employment opportunities to the region. The South Lake Washington neighborhood will be a center of activity in the Puget Sound 44 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAfTlhd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM . Redevelopment in this area will also include residential opportunities in low-to mid-rise buildings with upper-story office and/or ground-related retail. Additional supporting retail will also be constructed. Logan Avenue is extended and redeveloped for public use as a major, tree-lined parkway. During the second generation of redevelopment in District One, changing property values and further investment will allow for higher density development in the form of offices and residences mixed with other l:lses. As this area is transformed into a mature mixed-use district, community gathering spaces and recreation facilities to support the City's neighborhoods and business districts become viable. Cultural facilities, as well as convention and conference centers may be located within the District and could be incorporated into mixed-use development with retail, office and hotels. Small parks, open space, and community gathering places will be incorporated into site design. Facilities such as multiple-screen theaters and other cultural facilities may add to the amenity value of the District. District One Policies Objective LU-YY: 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. Policy LU-297. Support office and technology-based uses with retail uses and services along portions of the ground floors to facilitate the creation of an urban and pedestrian environment. Policy LU-298. Support uses supporting high-technology industries such as biotechnology, life sciences, and information technology by providing retail amenities and services in the area. Policy LU-299. Allow for the development of destination retail centers that are consistent with a district-wide conceptual plan. Policy LU-300. Encourage the placement of buildings for retail tenants along pedestrian- oriented streets to create urban configurations.:. Policy LU-3Ot. Ensure that big-box re~ail functions as an anchor to larger, cohesive, urban-scale retail developments. Policy L U .. 302. Encourage a variety of architectural treatments and styles to create an urban environment. Objective LU-ZZ: Create an urban district initially characterized by high-quality, compact, low-rise development that can accommodate a range of independent retail, office, research, or professional companies. Support the continuing investment in and transition of low-rise development into more intensive, urban forms of development to support a vital mixed-use district over time. Policy LU-303. Encourage pedestrian-oriented development through master planning, building location, and design guidelines. 43 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARJNG DRAF1ihd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM to the west and the Employment Area-Industrial area to the east, will make it difficult to achieve true urban intensities in District One at the beginning of this transition. The overall Vision for the District contemplates much more than a series oflow-rise structures with large parking lots. Therefore, it is important that this initial development facilitates later stages of investment as the neighborhood matures and property values increase. It is also critical that the early-stage vision for District One sets the stage for high-quality redevelopment in District Two. The following "visions" have been developed for each District. Vision -District One The changes in District One will be dramatic, as surface parking lots and existing large- scale industrial buildings are replaced by retail, flex tech, and office uses. Initial development may be characterized by large-format, low-rise buildings surrounding internal surface parking lots and bordered by a strong pedestrian-oriented spine along Park Avenue. As the Urban Center-North evolves, the buildings of District One may be remodeled and/or replaced with taller, higher density structures. Parking structures may also be built in future phases as infill projects that further the urbanization of the District. Two initial patterns of development are anticipated within the District: one, creating a destination retail shopping district; and the other, resulting in a more diverse mixed-use, urban scale office and technical center with supporting commercial retail uses. It is hoped that over time these patterns will blend to become a cohesive mixed-use district. In its first phases of development, District One hosts for the region a new form of retail center. Absent are the physical constraints of a covered mall. Although parking initially may be handled in surface lots, their configuration, juxtaposed with smaller building units, eliminates the expanse of paving that makes other retail shopping areas unappealing to pedestrians. Buildingfacades, of one or two stories, are positioned adjacent to sidewalks and landscaped promenades. Destination retail uses that draw from a sub-regional or regional market blend with small, specialty stores in an integrated shopping environment to support other businesses in the area. While large-format ("big- box '') retail stores anchor development, they do not stand-alone. Rather, they are architecturally and functionally connected to the smaller shops and stores in integrated shopping centers. Cafes with outdoor seating, tree-lined boulevards and small gathering places invite shoppers to linger after making their initial purchases. Retail development takes an urban form with high-quality design considering a human scale and pedestrian orientation. While retail development will add to the City's tax base and create a modest increase in employment, the vision for the Urban Center-North is that of a dense employment center. Within the initial phases of redevelopment, job growth will also occur in high-quality, well-designed flex/tech development and low-to mid-rise office, lab and research and development buildings that provide attractive environments for companies offering high- wage careers in information technology, life sciences and light (clean) manufacturing and assembly industries. 42 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFTlhd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM the re-development area. Examples of uses that serve the needs of existing populations include neighborhood-scale retail that addresses the day-to-day needs of residents, restaurants and coffee houses, public facilities, and places of assembly such as parks and plazas. Policies for Public Facilities Policy LU-294. Evaluate public facility:needs for projected new populations within the Urban Center -North to accommodate a wide range of future users. Policy LU-29S. Support a partnership with community stakeholders such as the Renton School District 0 provide a transition for public properties adj acent to the Urban Center- North such as the Sartori School and Renton Stadium facilities. Transition of these facilities could range from accommodating a new clientele as the area transitions to mixed use activities, or physical re-deve~opment of properties addressing the needs of employees or residents ofthe Urban Center. Policy LU-296. Recognize the Renton Municipal Airport as an essential public facility. (See Section on Airport Compatibility Policies). I Urban Center North Districts The proposed Urban Center-North is divided into two districts for planning purposes. Each District has a different emphasis in terms ofrange, intensity and mix of uses. These are District One, east of Logan Avenue, and District Two, west of Logan Avenue. The implementation of planning concepts for District Two will be dependent on decisions by The Boeing Company regarding continued airplane assembly operations at the Renton Plant. For this reason, initiation of redevelopment in District Two will likely occur after transition of the area east of Logan Avenue, District One, has begun. Consolidation of Boeing operations may cause certain property located within District One to be deemed surplus, making it available for redevelopment within the near future. District One is envisioned to include a variety of uses. The intensity ofthese uses would require substantial infrastructure improv:ements. More extensive development, ultimately anticipated with the future development of District Two, will likely require even more significant infrastructure upgrades. Redevelopment in both districts ofthe Urban Center -North will be responsive and protective of the North Renton residential neighborhood to the south. While the North Renton neighborhood is not a part ofth6 Urban Center,its residents will benefit from the significant amenities provided by development of a new urban community. Redevelopment within both districts will occur in a manner that is not incompatible with the operations at the Renton Municipal Airport, recognizing that the airport is an essential public facility located within an urban area. Redevelopment within both districts will be consistent with the City's Airport Compatible Land Use Program. The program responds to State requirements to consider how land use in the surrounding areas affects the Renton airport. The current supply of un de rut iii zed land north ofN. 8th Street creates an immediate redevelopment opportunity for a first phase of development in District One. However, the industrial character of the surroundi~g developed properties, both within District Two 41 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM Policy LU-28t. Address the mix and compatibility of uses, residential density, conceptual building, site and landscape design, identification of gateway features, signs, circulation, transit opportunities, and phasing through master plan and site plan review process. Policy LU-282. Fully integrate signage, building height, bulk, setbacks, landscaping, and parking considerations in structures and site plans across the various components of each proposed development. Policy LU-283. Require significant pedestrian element in internal site circulation plans. Policy LU-284. Allow phasing plans for mixed-use projects. Policy LU-28S. Consider placement of structures and parking areas in initial redevelopment plans to facilitate later infill development at higher densities and intensities over time. Policy LU-286. Support structured parking to facilitate full redevelopment ofthe Urban Center over the 30-year planning horizon. Where structured parking is infeasible for early phases of development, parking should be located in the rear or the side of the primary structure. Policy LU-287. Discourage parking lots between structures and street right-of-way. Policy LU-288. Orient buildings to streets to emphasize urban character, maximize pedestrian activity and minimize automobile use within the District. Policy LU-289. Use design regulations to provide direction on site design, building design, landscape treatments, and parking and circulation. Policy LU-290. Support a combination of internal and external site design features such as: 1) Plazas; 2) Prominent architectural features; 3) Significant natural features; 4) Distinctive focal features; and 5) Gateways. Policies for surrounding residential area (north Renton neighborhood south of N 6th St) Policy LU-291. Provide a transition in land use with respect to intensity of development where areas mapped Residential Single Family and Residential Options border Urban Center -North designations. Policy LU-292. Create boulevard standards for arterial streets connecting or running through adjacent residential neighborhoods that address noise, pedestrian sidewalks, planting areas between vehicular lanes and pedestrian areas, traffic calming techniques, lighting standards, a landscape planting plan for street trees and other vegetation, and street furniture. Policy LU-293. Support a mix of activities within the Urban Center -North designation that support populations in adjacent residential areas as well as new development within 40 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\EJements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM Policy LU-26S. Support more urban intensity of development (e.g. building height, bulk, landscaping, parking standards) than witp.land uses in the suburban areas ofthe City outside the Urban Center. Policy LU-266. Achieve a mix of uses that improves the City's tax and employment base. Policy LU-267. Support a range and variety of commercial and office uses. Policy LU-268. Allow hospitality uses such as hotels, convention and conference centers. Policy LU-269. Co-locate uses within a site and/or building in order to promote urban style, mixed-use development. Policy LU-270. Support incorporation of public facilities such as schools, museums, medical offices, and government offices'into redevelopment efforts by developing a pUblic/private partnership with developers and other Renton stakeholders such as the school district, technical college, and hospital district. , Policy LU-271. Support uses that sustain minimum Urban Center employment levels of 50 employees per gross acre and residential levels of 15 households per gross acre within the entire Urban Center. Policy LU-272. Support uses that serve the region, a sub-regional, or citywide market as well as the surrounding neighborhoods .. Policy LU-273. Support integration of community-scale office and service uses including restaurants, theaters, day care; art museums and studios. P,olicy LU-274. Support transit stations and transit usage connecting to a system of park and ride lots outside the Urban Center-North. Support park and ride facilities within the Urban Center only when they are included in structured parking as a stand-alone use or are developed as part of a mixed-use project. Policy LU-27S. Support an expanded and extended public right-of-way in the vicinity of the present Logan Avenue to provide new arterial access within the Urban Center. Additionally, this will provide a physic~l buffer between redevelopment and continuing airplane manufacturing operations. Policy LU-276. Support extension of Park Ave. to Lake Washington. Policy LU-277. Recognize the need for secure limited access within large manufacturing facilities by retaining private drives and roads in areas where airplane manufacturing operations continue. . Policy LU-278. Support creation of a significant gateway feature within gateway nodes as shown on the Urban Center-North Gateway Map. Policy LU-279. Support private/public partnerships to plan and finance infrastructure development, public uses and amenities. Policy LU-280. Use a hierarchy of conceptual plan, master plan and site plan review and approval to encourage the cohesive development of large land areas within the Urban Center-North. Incorporate integrated design regulations into this review process. 39 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM Policy LU-2S7. Parking lots and structures should employ and maintain landscaping and other design techniques to minimize the visual impacts of these uses. Objective LU-WW: Improve the visual and physical appearance of buildings to create a more positive image for downtown. Policy LU-2SS. Site and building designs, (e.g. signage; building height, bulk and setback; landscaping; and parking, should reflect unity of design to create a distinct sense of place and mitigate adverse impacts on adjacent uses. Policy LU-2S9. Incentives should be developed to encourage rehabilitation (e.g. facade restoration) of older downtown buildings. Objective LU-XX: Maintain and expand the available amenities to make the Urban Center -Downtown more appealing to existing and potential customers, residents, and employees. Policy LU-260. Design guidelines should assist developers in creating attractive projects that add value to the downtown community, attract new residents, employees, and visitors, and foster a unique downtown identity. Policy LU-261. Design guidelines may vary by zone within the downtown area to recognize and foster unique identities for the different land use areas (i.e. South Renton's Burnett Park subarea). Policy LU-262. New downtown parks should complement existing park facilities and be· compatible with planned trails. Trails should be integrated with the existing trail system. Policy LU-263. Urban Center -Downtown development should be designed to take advantage of existing unique downtown amenities such as the Cedar River, City parks and trails, the downtown Transit Center, IKEA Performing Arts Center, and Renton High School. Policy LU-264. Public amenities such as art, fountains, or similar features should be incorporated into the design of public areas, major streets and gateways of the Urban Center -Downtown. URBAN CENTER NORTH LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The purpose of the UC-N is to redevelop industrial land for new office, residential, and commercial uses at a sufficient scale to implement the Urban Centers criteria adopted in the Countywide Planning Policies. This portion of the Urban Center is anticipated to attract large-scale redevelopment greater than that in the Urban Center-Downtown, due to the large available land holdings under single ownership. In addition, this new development is expected to include a wider group of uses including remaining industrial activities, new research and development facilities, laboratories, retail integrated into pedestrian-oriented shopping districts, and a range of urban-scale mixed-use residential, office and commercial uses. The combined uses will generate significant tax income for the City and provide jobs to balance the capacity for the more than 5, 000 additional households in the Urban Center. Development is expected to complement the Urban Center-Downtown. UC-N policies will provide a blueprint for the transition of land over the next 30 years into this dynamic, urban mixed-use district. 38 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CIlY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-243. Future development and improvements in the Urban Center- Downtown should emphasize non-automobile oriented travel both to and within the downtown, while maintaining an adequate amount of parking for regional retail customers. Transit and parking programs should be integrated, balanced, and implemented concurrently. , Policy LU-244. 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 LU-24S. Permanent park and ride facilities in the Urban Center -Downtown should use structured parking garages and support the Transit Center. Policy LU-246. Continue development of transit-oriented development in the activity node established by the downtown transit facility. Policy LU-247. Seek ways of improving speed and reliability of transit serving Renton's Downtown. Policy LU-248. Transit span of service should increase as Downtown Renton adds evening entertainment, dining, and recreation opportunities. Objective LU-UU: Improve the City's pedestrian and bicycle network to increase access to and circulation within the Urban Center -Downtown. Policy LU-249. Pedestrian spaces should be emphasized and connected throughout the downtown. Policy LU-2S0. Pedestrians should be given priority use of sidewalks within the Urban Center -Downtown designated pedestrian areas. Policy LU-2SI. Block lengths and widths should be maintained at the pedestrian- friendly standards that predominate within the downtown. Policy LU-2S2. Where right-of-way is available and bicycle demand justify them, bicycle lanes should be marked and signed to accommodate larger volumes of bicycle traffic on select streets designated by the City. Policy LU-2S3. Secure bicycle parking facilities, such as bike lockers and bike racks should be provided at residential, commercial, and public establishments to encourage bicycle use. Objective LU-VV: Improve the visual, physical and experiential quality, lighting and safety, especially for pedestrians, along downtown streets. Policy LU-2S4. Strong visual linkages should be created between downtown Renton and neighborhoods using landscaped arterial streets and connectors. Policy LU-2SS. Buildings along South 3rd Street between Main and Burnett Avenues should retain a pedestrian scale by employing design techniques that maintain the appearance and feel oflow-rise structures to avoid creation of the "canyon effect" (e.g. preserving historic fac;ades, stepping fac;ades back above the second or third floor). Policy LU-2S6. Downtown gateways should employ distinctive landscaping, signage, art, architectural style, and similar techniques to better delineate the downtown and enhance its unique character. 37 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use. doc Last printed 8125/2004 11 :55 AM ' CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-231. Walk-in customer-oriented businesses should be encouraged to locate along street frontages in the Downtown Core Area and the portion of the Urban Center - Downtown located west of it. Policy LU-232. Medium-rise residential (6-10 stories) should be located within the Cedar River Subarea, primarily between the Cedar River and South 2nd, and between South 7th and the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way. Policy LU-233. The area between South 7th and the Burlington Northern Railroad right- of-way should include a combination oflow-(1-5 stories) and medium-rise residential to provide a transition between the employment area and the mixed-use core. Policy LU-234. Specific streetscapes, development standards, and design guidelines for. the South Renton Neighborhood are outlined in the South Renton Neighborhood Plan within the Subarea Plan section of the Comprehensive Plan. Objective LU-SS: Promote a reasonable balance between parking supply and parking demand within the downtown. Policy LU-23S. Parking should be structured whenever feasible. Accessory surface parking is discouraged. Policy LU-236. The existing supply of parking should be better managed to encourage joint use rather than parking for each individual business. Policy LU-237. Downtown parking standards should recognize the different demands and requirements of both local and regional commercial parking versus those of office and residential uses. Policy LU-238. Alternatives to individual on-site parking that encourage efficient use of urban land (e.g. fees in lieu of parking, multiple-use or shared parking leased off-site parking, car-sharing) should be encouraged. Policy LU-239. Parking standards and requests for parking modifications for downtown residents should reflect the market demand of urban residential uses, taking into account transit service availability, car-sharing availability, and other transportation demand management tools available. Policy LU-240. In order to maximize on-street parking availability in the downtown, loading and delivery areas for downtown uses should be consolidated and limited to alleys, other off-street areas, or city-designated on-street loading zones. Alley and off- street loading and delivery areas should be screened from view of the street. Policy LU-241. Alleys should be maintained in the Urban Center -Downtown in order to facilitate use of alley-accessed parking areas, freight delivery, and removal of refuse and recyclables. Objective LU-TT: Develop a transit circulation/distribution system that provides convenient connections between downtown and residential, employment, and other commercial areas within the Renton planning area. Policy LU-242. 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. 36 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11:55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-222. Automobile-related sales and service uses that require large amounts of land and currently exist within the Urban Center -Downtown should be encouraged to locate in the City's "Auto Mall" located outside of the Urban Center -Downtown or to consolidate their sites and provide mu1ti~storied facilities. New automobile-related sales and service uses should be discouraged from locating in the Urban Center -Downtown. Policy LU-223. Discourage uses including expansion of existing uses in the Urban Center -Downtown that require large areas of surface parking and/or drive-through service queuing space. Objective LU-QQ: Encourage additional residential development in the Urban Center -Downtown supporting the Countywide Planning Policies definition of Urban Center. Policy LU-224. Maximize the use of existing urban services and civic amenities and revitalize the City's downtown by promoting medium to high-density residential development in the downtown area. Allowed densities should conform to the criteria for Urban Centers in the countywide policies. Policy LU-225. Mixed-use development where residential and commercial uses are allowed in the same building or on the same site, should be encouraged in the urban Center -Downtown. Incentives should be developed to encourage future development or redevelopment projects that incorporate residential uses. Policy LU-226. Net residential development densities in the Urban Center -Downtown designation should achieve a range of 14-100 dwelling units per acre and vary by zoning district. Policy LU-227. Density bonuses up to 150 dulac may be granted within designated areas for provision of, or contribution to, a public amenity (e.g. passive recreation, public art) or provision of additional structured public parking. Policy LU-228. Condominium development and high-density owner-occupied townhouse development is encouraged in the Urban Center -Downtown. Objective LU-RR: Recognize the following Downtown Districts reflecting varying development standards and uses that distinguish these areas. 1) Downtown Pedestrian District; 2) Downtown Core; 3) South Renton's Williams-'Vells Subarea (see South Renton Neighborhood Plan); 4) South Renton's Burnett Park Subarea (see South Renton Neighborhood Plan); and 5) Cedar River Subarea north of the Downtown Core. Policy LU-229. Encourage the most intensive development in the Downtown Pedestrian District and Downtown Core with a transition to lower-scale commercial and residential projects in areas surrounding the Downtown Core. Policy LU-230. Ground-floor uses with street frontage in the Downtown Pedestrian District should be limited to businesses that primarily cater to walk-in customer traffic (i.e. retail goods and services) in order to generate and maintain continuous pedestrian activity in these areas. 35 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 URBAN CENTER DOWNTOWN LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Urban Center -Downtown (UC-D) is expected to redevelop as a destination shopping area providing neighborhood, citywide, and sub-regional services and mixed-use residential development. UC-D residential development is expected to support urban scale multi-family projects at high densities, consistent with Urban Center policies. Projects in the UC-D are expected to incorporate mixed-uses including retail, office, residential, and service uses that support transit and further the synergism of public and private sector activities. In the surrounding neighborhoods, inf{ll urban scale townhouse and multi-family residential developments are anticipated. Site planning and infrastructure will promote a pedestrian scale environment and amenities. Objective LU-OO: Create a balance of land uses that contribute to the revitalization of downtown Renton and, with the designated Urban Center -North, fulfill the requirements of an Urban Center as defined by Countywide Planning Policies. Policy LU-216. Uses in the Urban Center Downtown should include a dynamic mix of uses, including retail, entertainment, restaurant, office, and residential, that contribute to a vibrant city core. Policy L U-217. Development and redevelopment of Urban Center Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. Policy LU-21S. Ground floor uses with street frontage along Wells Avenue South between Houser Way and South 2nd Street and along South 3rd Street between Main Avenue South and Burnett Avenue South should be limited to businesses which primarily cater to walk-in customer traffic (i.e. retail goods and services) in order to generate and maintain continuous pedestrian activity in these areas. Walk-in customer oriented businesses should also be encouraged to locate along street frontages in the remainder of the downtown core. Policy LU-219. Projects in the Urban Center -Downtown should achieve an urban density and intensity of development that is greater than typical suburban neighborhoods. Characteristics of urban intensity include no or little setbacks, taller structures, mixed-. uses, structured parking, and urban plazas and amenities within buildings. Policy LU-220. Non-conforming uses should transition to conforming uses. Non- conforming structures should be re-used to house conforming uses unless the size and scale of the structure significantly limits the intensity and quality of development that can be achieved. . . Policy LU-221. Development should not exceed mid-rise heiglits(maximumlO stories) within the Urban Center -Downtown .. Objective LU-PP: Encourage the evolution of downtown Renton as a regional . commercial district that complements the redevelopment expected to occur in the Urban Center -North. 34 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11:55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-20S. Consolidate access to existing streets and provide internal vehicular circulation that supports shared access. , Policy LU-209. Locate parking for residential uses in the mixed-use developments to minimize disruption of pedestrian or auto access to the retail component ofthe project. Policy LU-210. Connect residential uses to other uses in the Center through design features such as pedestrian access, sharea parking areas, and common open spaces. Objective NN: Implement Renton's Urban Center consistent with "Urban Centers criteria" of the Countywide Planning Policies (CPP) to create an area of concentrated employment and housing with direct service by high capacity transit and a wide range of land uses such as commercial/office/retail, recreation, public facilities, parks and open space. Policy LU-211. Renton's Urban Center should be maintained and redeveloped with supporting land use decisions and projects that accomplish the following objectives: 1) Enhance existing neighborhoods by creating investment opportunities in quality urban scale development; 2) Promote housing opportunities close, to employment and commercial areas; 3) Support development of an extensive transportation system to reduce dependency on automobiles; 4) Strive for urban densities that use land more efficiently; 5) Maximize the benefit of public investment in infrastructure and services; 6) Reduce costs of and time required for permitting; and 7) Evaluate and mitigate environmental impacts. Policy LU-212. Establish two sub-areas within Renton's Urban Center 1) Urban Center-Downtown (UC-D) is Renton's historic commercial district, surrounded by established residential neighborhoods. The UC-D is located from the Cedar River south to South 7th Street and between 1-405 on the east and Shattuck Avenue South on the west. 2) Urban Center-North (UC-N) is the area that includes Southport, the Puget Sound Energy sub-station, and the South Lake Washington redevelopment area. The UC-N is located generally from Lake Washington on the north, the Cedar River and Renton Municipal Airport to the west, Sixth ;Street and Renton Stadium to the south, and Houser Way to the east. Policy LU-2l3. Maintain zoning that creates capacity for employment levels of 50 employees per gross acre and residential levels of 15 households per gross acre within the Urban Center. ' Policy LU-214: Support developments that utilize Urban Center levels of capacity. Where market conditions do not support Urban Center employment and residential levels, support site planning and/or phasing alternatives that demonstrate how, over time, infill or redevelopment can meet Urban Center objectives. Policy LU-21S. Site and building design should be pedestrian/people oriented with provisions for transit and automobiles where appropriate. 33 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-196. Designate Center in locations with the following criteria: 1) A nucleus of existing multi-use development; 2) Potential for redevelopment, or vacant land to encourage significant concentration of development; 3) Principal gateways to the City as defined in the Community Design Element; 4) Center locations should be located on major transit and transportation routes; 5) Center locations should be served by the City's arterial street system. Policy LU-197. Change adopted boundaries only in the following circumstances: 1) The original mapping failed to consider a major natural feature or significant land use that would make implementation of the boundary illogical, or 2) The amount ofland within a Center is inadequate to allow development of the range and intensity of uses envisioned for the Center. Policy LU-198. Support new office and commercial development that is more intensive than the older office and commercial development in existing Centers in order to create more compact and efficient Centers over time. Policy LU-199. Allow stand-alone residential development of various types and urban densities in portions of Centers not conducive to commercial development, or in the Urban Center in districts designated for residential use. Policy LU-200. Allow residential uses throughout Centers as part of mixed-use developments. Consider bonus incentives for housing types compatible with commercial uses or lower density residential that is adjacent to Centers. Policy LU-20t. Include uses that are compatible with each other within mixed-use developments; for example, office and certain retail uses with residential, office, and retail. Policy LU-202. Locate and design commercial uses within a residential mixed-use development in a manner that preserves privacy and quiet for residents. Policy LU-203. Modify existing commercial and residential uses that are adjacent to or within new proposed development to implement the new Center land use vision as much as possible through alterations in parking lot design, landscape, signage, and site plan as redevelopment opportunities occur. Policy LU-204. Consolidate signage for mixed-use development on one structure. Policy LU-20S. Identify major natural features and support development of new focal points that define the Center arid are visually distinctive. Policy LU-206. Design focal points to include a combination of public areas such as parks or plazas, architectural features such as towers, outstanding building design, transit stops, or outdoor eating areas. These features should be connected to pedestrian pathways if possible. Policy LU-207. Evaluate existing intersections of arterial roadways for opportunities to create focal points. 32 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\Gfy1A Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM . CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 IX. CENTERS Goal: Develop well-balanced attractive, convenient, robust commercial office, office, and residential development within designated Centers serving the City and the region. Discussion: The Centers category of land use includes two areas of the City, the Center Village in the Highlands and the Urban Center located in the historic downtown and the employment area north to Lake Washington. The Urban Center includes two sub-areas: Urban Center-Downtown (220 acres) and the Urban Center-North (310 acres). Together these two areas are envisioned to evolve into a vibrant city core that provides arts, entertainment, regional employment opportunities, recreation, and quality urban residential neighborhoods. The Renton Urban Center is envisioned as the dynamic heart of a growing regional city. Renton's Urban Center will provide significant capacity for new housing in order to absorb the city's share of future regional growth. This residential population will help to balance the City's employment population and thereby meet the policy directive of a 2:1 ratio of jobs to housing. The Center Village designation is envisioned as a revitalized residential and commercial area providing goods and services to the Greater Highlands area. The area could potentially become a focal point for a larger area, the Coal Creek Corridor, connecting Renton to Newcastle to Issaquah. While development is envisioned at a smaller scale than expected in the Urban Center, the Village Center will still focus on urban mixed-use projects with a pedestrian oriented development pattern. Objective LU-MM: Encourage a wide range and combination of uses, developed at sufficient intensity to maximize efficient use of land, support transit use, and create a viable district. Policy LU-193. Promote the innovative site planning clustering of Center uses and discourage the development of strip commercial areas .. Policy LU-194. Phase implementation of development within Centers to support economically feasible development in the short term but also provide a transition to achieve new development consistent with long term land use objectives. Policy LU-19S. Designate Center boundaries according to the following criteria: 1) The boundary should coincide with a major change in land use type or intensity; 2) Boundaries should consider topography and natural features such as ravines, hills, and significant stands of trees; 3) Boundaries should occur along public rights-of-way including streets or utility easements, or at rear property lines where justified by the existing land use pattern. Boundary lines should not be drawn through the interior of parcels; and 4) As a maximum distance, the boundary should be drawn within a walkable distance from one or two focal points, which may be defined by intersections, transit stops, or shopping centers. 31 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-190. Support project site planning that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in order to meet the intent ofthe objective: 1) Buildings oriented toward public streets, 2) Private open space for ground-related units, 3) Common open or green space in sufficient amount to be useful, 4) Preferably underground parking or structured parking located under the residential building, 5) Surface parking, if necessary, to be located to the side or rear of the residential building(s), 6) Landscaping of all pervious areas of the property, and 7) Landscaping, consisting of groundcover and street trees (at a minimum), of all setbacks and rights-of way abutting the property. Policy LU-I91. Residential Multi-family projects in the RM-I zone should have a maximum site coverage by buildings of thirty-five (35) percent, or forty-five (45) percent if greater coverage can be demonstrated to be both mitigated on site with amenities and compatible with existing buildings on abutting and adjacent lots. Policy LU-192. Residential Multi-family projects should have maximum site coverage by impervious materials of seventy-five (75) percent. 30 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & VisionlliEARING DRAFlIhd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM r CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-18S. Development density in the Residential Multi-family designation should be within a range often (10) dwelling units per acre as a minimum to twenty (20) dwelling units per acre as a maximum. : Objective LU-KK: Due to increased impacts to privacy and personal living space inherent in higher density living environments, new development should be designed to create a high quality living environment. Policy LU-186. New stacked flat and townhouse development in Residential Multi- family.designations should be compatible in size, scale, bulk, use, and design with existing multi-family developments in the vicinity. Policy LU-187. Detached cottage housing designed to include site amenities with common open space features should be supported in multi-family designations if density goals are met. Policy LU-188. Evaluate project proposals in Residential Multi-frup.ily designations to consider the transition to lower density uses where multi-family sites abut lower density zones. Setbacks may be increased, heigpts reduced, and additional landscape buffering required through site plan review. 1) In order to increase the potential compatibility of multi-family projects, with other projects of similar use and density, minimum setbacks for side yards should be proportional to the total lot width, i.e. wider lots should require larger setback dimensions; 2) Taller buildings (greater than two stories) should have larger side yard setback dimensions; and 3) Heights of buildings should be limited to three stories and thirty-five (35) feet, unless greater heights can be demonstrated to be compatible with existing buildings on abutting and adjacent lots. Objective LU-LL: New Residential Multi-family projects should demonstrate provision of a building and environment that contributes to a high quality of life for future residents, regardless of incom~ level. Policy LU-189. Support project desigri that incorporates the following, or similar elements, in architectural design: 1) Variation of facades on all sides of structures visible from the street, such as vertical and horizontal modulation or articulation; 2) Angular rooflines on multiple planes and with roof edge articulation such as modulated cornices; 3) Private entries from the public sidewalk fronting the building for ground floor units; 4) Ground floor units elevated from sidewalk level; 5) Upper-level access interior to the building; 6) Balconies that serve as functional open space for individual units; and 7) Common entryways with canopy or similar feature. 29 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11:55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-181. Mixed-use development in the form of civic, convenience commercial development, or other non-residential structures, may be allowed in the central places of Residential Medium Density development projects within the Residential 14 zone, subject to compliance with criteria established through development regulations. RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The multi-family residential land use designation is intended to encourage a range of multi-family living environments that provide shelter for a wide variety of people in differing living situations, from all income levels, and in all stages of life. Although ·some people live in multi-family situations because they do not have an alternative, others prefer living in multi-family environments rather than in single-family, detached houses. Regardless of why they live there, they want and deserve the same high standards for their homes and neighborhoods. Single-familyand multi-family residential developments have different impacts on·the community. The City must identify a housing mix and implement policies that adequately address and balance the needs of both residents and the community as a whole. The Multi-family Residential designation is implemented by Residential Multi-family Infill zoning. Objective LU-JJ: Encourage the development of in fill parcels with quality projects in existing multi-family districts. Policy LU-182. Residential Multi-family designations should be in areas ofthe City where projects would be compatible with existing uses and where infrastructure is adequate to handle impacts from higher density uses. Policy LU-183. Land within the Residential Multi-family designation areas should be used to meet multi-family housing needs, without expanding the area boundaries, until land capacity in this designation is used. Residential Multi":family designations have the highest priority for development or redevelopment with multi-family uses. Policy LU-184. Expansion of this designation is limited to properties meeting the following criteria: I) Properties under consideration should take access from a principal arterial, minor arterial, or collector. Direct access should not be through a less intense land use designation area; 2) Properties under consideration must abut an existing Residential Multi-family land use designation on at least two (2) sides and be on the same side of the principal arterial, minor arterial, or collector serving it; and 3) Any such expansion of the Residential Multi-family land use designation should not bisect or truncate another contiguous land use district. 28 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Objective LU-II: Residential Medium Density development should be urban in form and fit into existing residential neighborhoods if developed as infill projects. Policy LU-I71. Buildings should front the street rather than be organized around interior courtyards or parking areas. Policy L U-172. Non-residential structures, such as community recreation buildings, that are part of the development, may have dimensions larger than residential structures, but should be compatible in design and dimensions with surrounding residential development. Policy LU-173. Non-residential structures should be clustered and connected within the overall development through the organization of roads, blocks, yards, focal points, and amenity features to create a neighborhood. Policy LU-174. Single-family detached building types in the Residential Medium Density designation should have a maximum lot coverage by the primary structure of fifty (50) percent. Policy LU-17S. In the Residential Medium Density designation common open space equal to 1,200-square feet per unit and maintained by a homeowners' association, should be provided for each semi-attached or attached unit. Policy LU-176. Support site plans that 'address compatibility with existing development patterns and sensitivity to unique features and differences among established neighborhoods. Interpret development standards to support ground-related orientation, coordinated structural design, and private yards or substantial common space areas. Policy LU-177. A minimum of fifty (50) percent ofa project in the Residential 14 zone' should consist of the following primary residential types: traditional detached, zero lot line detached, or townhouses with individual yards that are scaled appropriately for each unit. Policy LU-178. Longer townhouse buildings or other types of multi-family buildings, considered secondary residential types (see RMC 4-9-065), should be limited in size so that the mass and bulk ofthe building has a small scale multi-family character, rather than a large, garden-style apartment development. Policy LU-179. In the Residential 14 zone, multi-unit townhouses that qualify as a primary residential type (see RMC 4-9-065) should be limited in size so that the mass and bulk is at a human scale. Policy LU-180. Projects in a Residential 14 zone should have no more than fifty (50) percent of the units designed as secondary residential types, i.e. longer townhouse building clusters, or longer multi-family buildings of other types. 27 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Yision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 acre should be available, subject to Density Bonus Review and other applicable development conditions. Policy LU-164. When a minimum density is applicable, the minimum development density in the Residential Medium Density designation should be 7 dwelling units per net acre. Objective LU-HH: Residential Medium Density designations should be areas where creative approaches to housing density can be implemented. Policy L U-16S. Provision of small-lot, single-family detached unit types, townhouses, and multi-family structures compatible with a single-family character should be allowed and encouraged in the Residential Medium Density designation, provided that density standards can be met (see also the Housing Element for housing types). Policy LU-166. Very small-lot single-family housing, such as cottages, zero-lot line detached, semi-detached, townhouses, and small scale multi-family units should be allowed in the Residential Medium Density designation in order to provide a wide range of housing types. Policy LU-167. A range and variety oflot sizes and building densities should be encouraged. Policy LU-168. Residential developments should include public amenities that function as a gathering place within the development and should include features such as a public square, open space, park, civic or commercial uses in the R-14 zone. The central place should include passive amenities such as benches and fountains, and be unified by a design motif or common theme. Policy LU-169. Residential Medium Density site development plans having attached or semi-attached housing types should reflect the following criteria for projects: 1) Parking should be encouraged in the rear or side yards or under the structure; 2) Structures should be located on lots or arranged in a manner to appear like a platted development to ensure adequate light and air, and views (if any) are preserved between lots or structures; 3) Buildings should be massed in a manner that promotes a pedestrian scale with a small neighborhood feeling; 4) Each dwelling unit should have an identifiable entrance and front on streets rather than courtyards and parking lots; 5) Fences may be constructed ifthey contribute to an open, spacious feeling between units and structures; and 6) Streetscapes should include green, open space for each unit. Policy LU-170. Residential Medium Density development should provide condominium or fee simple homeownership opportunities, as well as rental or lease options. 26 . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-IS7. Residential Medium Density designated areas should be zoned for either Residential 10 dwelling units per net acre (R-IO), Residential 14 dwelling units per net acre (R-14), or new zoning designations that allow housing in this density range. Policy LU-ISS. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods may be considered for R-IO zoning if they meet three of the following criteria: 1) The area already has a mix of small-scale multi-family units or has had long standing duplex or low-density multi-family zoning; 2) Development patterns conducive to medium-density development are established; 3) Vacant lots exist or parcels have redevelopment potential for medium-density infill development; 4) The project site is adjacent to major arterial(s) and public transit service is located within y.. mile; , 5) The site can be buffered from existing single-family residential neighborhoods having densities of eight (8) dwelling units or less; or 6) The site can be buffered from adjacent or abutting incompatible uses. Policy LU-IS9. Areas may be considered for Residential 14 Zoning where the site meets the following criteria: 1) Adjacent to major arterial(s); 2) Adjacent to the Urban Center, Highlands Neighborhood Center, or Corridor Commercial designations; 3) Part of a designation totaling over 20 acres (acreage may be in separate ownership); 4) Site is buffered from single-family areas or other existing, potentially incompatible uses; and 5) Development within the density range and of similar unit type is achievable given environmental constraints. Policy LU-160. Support projects that create neighborhoods with diverse housing types that achieve continuity through the organization of roads, sidewalks, blocks, setbacks, community gathering places, and amenity features. ' Policy L U-161. Support residential development incorporating a hierarchy of streets, include streets connected 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 ifthere are environmental constraints). Policy LU-162. Development densitie~ in the Residential Medium Density designation area should range from seven (7) to eighteen (18) dwelling units per net acre, as specified by implementing zoning. Policy LU-163. For attached or semi-attached development in the R-I4 zoned portions of the Residential Medium Density designation, a bonus density of 18 dwelling units per 25 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-IS2. Single-family lot size, lot width, setbacks, and impervious surface should be sufficient to allow private open space, landscaping to provide buffers/privacy without extensive fencing, and sufficient area for maintenance activities. Policy LU-IS3. Interpret development standards to support plats designed to incorporate vehicular and pedestrian connections between plats and neighborhoods. Small projects composed of single parcels and/or mUltiple parcels of insufficient size to provide such connections should include future street stubs. Future street connections should be clearly signed notifying residents of future roadway connections. Policy LU-IS4. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill projects developed at higher densities within existing neighborhoods designed to incorporate street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Policy LU-ISS. New plats proposed at higher densities than adjacent neighborhood developments may be modified within the allowed density range to reduce conflicts between old and new development patterns. However, strict adherence to older standards is not required. Policy LU-IS6. Interpret development standards to support projects incorporating site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes that can be retained to enhance neighborhood character and preserve property values where possible. Replanting should occur where trees are not retained due to safety concerns. Retention of unique site features should be balanced with the objective of investing in neighborhoods within the overall context of the Vision Statement ofthis Comprehensive Plan. RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: The Residential Medium Density designation is intended to create the opportunity for neighborhoods that offer a variety of lot sizes, housing, and ownership options. Residential Medium Density neighborhoods should include a variety of unit types designed to incorporate features from both single-family and multi-family developments, support cost-efficient housing, facilitate injill development, encourage use of transit service, and promote the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. Objective LU-GG: Designate land for Residential Medium Density (RMD) where access, topography and adjacent land uses create conditions appropriate for a variety of unit types designed to incorporate features from both single-family and multi-family developments, and to support cost-efficient housing, infill development, transit service, and the efficient use of urban services and infrastructure. 24 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CIIT OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 1) Attractive residential streetscapes with landscaped front yards that are visible from the street; , 2) Landscaping, preferably with drought-resistant evergreen plant materials; 3) Large caliper street trees; 4) Irrigated landscape planting strips; 5) Low-impact development using landscaped buffers, open spaces, and other pervious surfaces; and 6) Significant native tree and vegetation retention and/or replacement. RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statemeltt: Lands in the Residential Single Family Designation are intended to be used for quality residential detached development organized into neighborhoods at urban densities. It is intended that larger subdivision, infill development, and rehabilitation of existing housing be carefully designed to enhance and improve the quality of single-family living environments. Policies in this section are to be considered together with the policies in the Regional Growth, Residential Growth Strategy section of the Land Use Element, the Community Design Element, and the Housing Element. Policies are implemented with R-8 zoning. Objective LU-FF: Encourage re-investment and rehabilitation of existing housing, and development of new residential plats resulting in quality neighborhoods that: 1) Are planned at urban densities and implement Growth Management targets, 2) Promote expansion and use of public transportation; and 3) Make more efficient use of urban 'services and infrastructure. Policy LU-147. Net development densities should fall within a range of 4.0 to 8.0 dwelling units per net acre in Residential Single Family neighborhoods. Policy LU-148. A minimum lot size of 5,000 square feet should be allowed on in-fill parcels ofless than %-acre (32,690 sq. ft.) in single-family designations. Allow a reduction in lot size to 4,500 square feet on parcels greater than %-acre to create an incentive for aggregation ofland. The minimum lot size is not intended to set the standard for density in the designation, but to provide flexibility in subdivision/plat design and facilitate development within the allowed density range. Policy LU-149. Lot size should exclude private sidewalks, easements, private road, and driveway easements, except alley easements. Policy LU-ISO. Required setbacks should exclude public or private legal access areas, established through or to a lot, and parking areas. Policy LU-ISI. Maximum height of structures should not exceed two (2) stories in single-family residential neighborhoods. 23 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-137. Warehousing, outdoor storage, equipment yards, and industrial uses should not be allowed. Where such uses exist, measures should be taken to negotiate the transition of these uses as residential redevelopment occurs. Policy LU-138. To provide for more efficient development patterns and maximum preservation of open space, residential development may be clustered and or lot sizes reduced within allowed density levels in Residential Low Density designations. Policy LU-139. Minimize impacts of animal and crop-raising on adjacent residential uses and critical areas such as wetlands, streams, and rivers. Policy LU-140. Control scale and density of accessory buildings and barns to maintain compatibility with other residential uses. . Policy LU-141. Residential Low Density areas may be incorporated into Urban Separators. Policy LU-142. Undeveloped portions of Residential Low Density areas may be considered for designation of trail easements or other public benefits through agreements with private parties. Objective LU-EE: Designate a Residential 4 dulacre overlay area within the Residential Low Density designation in those portions of the RLD designation appropriate for urban levels of development by providing suitable environments for suburban and/or estate style, single-family residential dwellings. Policy LU-143. Within the Residential 4 dulacre overlay area allow a maximum density of 4-units per net acre to encourage larger lot development and increase the supply of upper income housing consistent with the City's Housing Element. Policy LU-144. Ensure quality development by supporting site plans and plats that incorporate quality building and landscaping standards. Policy LU-14S. Interpret development standards to support projects with higher quality housing by requiring: 1) A variety of compatible housing styles making up block fronts; 2) Additional architectural features such as pitched roofs, roof overhangs, and/or decorative cornices, fenestration and trim; and 3) Building modulation and use of durable exterior materials such as wood, masonry, stucco, or brick. Policy LU-146. Interpret development standards to support provision of landscape features that typically would not otherwise be provided as well as innovative site planning. Criteria should include: 22 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land l,lse.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 RESIDENTIAL LO W DENSITY LAND USE DESIGNATION Purpose Statement: Policies in this section are intended to guide development on land appropriate for a range of low intensity residential and employment where land is either constrained by sensitive areas or where ,the City has the opportunity to add large-lot housing stock, at urban densities, to its inventory. Lands that are not appropriate for urban levels of development are designated either Resource Conservation or Residential Low Density Zoning. Lands that either do not have signijicani sensitive areas, or can be adequately protected by the critical areas ordinance, are designated Residential 4. Objective LU-DD: Provide for a range of lifestyles and appropriate uses adjacent to and compatible with urban development in areas ofthe City and Potential Annexation Area constrained by extensive natural features, providing urban separators and/or providing a transition to Rural Designations within King County. Policy LU-133. Identify and map areas ofthe City where environmentally sensitive areas such as 100-year floodplains, floodways, and hazardous landslide and erosion areas are extensive and the application of critical areas regulations alone is insufficient to guide future development. Policy LU-134. Base development densities should range from 1 home per 10 acres to 1 home per acre on Residential Low Density designated land with significant environmental constraints, including but not limited to: steep slopes, erosion hazard, floodplains, and wetlands. Density should be a maximum of 4-dulnet acre on portions of the Residential Low Density land where these constraints are not extensive and urban densities are appropriate. Policy LU-13S. For the purpose of mapping four dwelling units per acre (4-dulac) zoned areas as contrasted with lower density R-1 and Resource Conservation areas, the prevalence of extensive sensitive areas should be interpreted to mean: 1) Critical areas encumber a significant percentage of the gross area; , 2) Developable areas are separated frorri one another by pervasive critical areas or occur on isolated portions of the site and access limitations exist; 3) The location of the sensitive area results in a non-contiguous development pattern; 4) The area is a designated urban separator; or 5) Application of the Critical Areas Ordinance setbackslbuffers and/or net density definition would create a situation where the allowed density could not be accommodated on the remaining net developable area without modifications or variances to other standards. Policy LU-136. Rural activities, including agricultural and animal husbandry, should be allowed, except where such uses would have negative environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated. 21 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM : CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-124. Promote the timely and logical progression of residential development. Priority should be given to development ofland with infrastructure capacity and land located closer to the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-12S. Encourage a city-wide mix of housing types including: 1) Large-lot single family; 2) Small-lot single family; 3) Small-scale and large-scale rental and condominium multi-family housing; and 4) Residential/commercial mixed-use development. Objective LU-CC: Maintain the goal of a fifty-fifty ratio of single family to multi- family housing outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-126. A maximum of fifty percent (50%) of future residential growth should occur in multi-family housing; in parts of the City and PAA located outside of the Urban Center. Policy LU-127. Infrastructure impacts ofthe goal of 50/50 ratio of single-family to multi-family outside the Urban Center should be evaluated as part of the City's Capital Improvements program. Policy LU-12S; Multi-family unit types are encouraged as part of mixed-use developments in the Urban Center, Highlands Neighborhood Center, the Commercial/OfficelResidential designation, and the Corridor Commercial designation. Policy LU-129. Small-lot, single-family infill developments and plat~ should be supported as alternatives to multi-family development to both increase the City's supply of single-family detached housing and provide homeownership opportunities. Policy L U-130. Adopt urban density of at least 4 dwelling units per net acre for residential uses except in areas with identified and documented sensitive areas and/or areas identified as urban separators. Policy LU-131. Encourage larger lot single-family development in areas providing a transition to the Urban Growth Boundary and King County Rural Designation. The City should discourage more intensive platting patterns in these areas. Policy LU-132. Discourage creation of socio-economic enclaves, especially where lower income units would be segregated within a development. 20 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 YIn. RESIDENTIAL POLICIES Goal: Promote new development and neighborhoods in the City that: 1) Contribute to a strong sense of com,nunity and neighborhood identity; 2) Are walkable places where people can shop, play, and get to work without always having to drive; 3) Are developed at densities sufficient to support public transportation and make efficient use of urban services and infrastructure; 4) Offer a variety of housing types for a population diverse in age, income, and lifestyle; , 5) Are varied or unique in character; , 6) Support ~'Jlexible grid" street and pathway patterns where appropriate; 7) Are visually attractive, safe, and healthy environments in which to live; 8) Offer connection to the community instead of isolation; and 9) Provide a sense of home. Discussion: The purpose of the Residential policies is to provide a Citywide residential growth strategy. The Residential policies address the location of housing development, housing densities, non-residential uses allowed in residential areas, site design, and housing types in neighborhoods. (See Public Facilities Section for policies on schools, churches, and other facilities in residential areas. See Housing Element for policies relating to housing types and neighborhoods and the Community Design Element for policies guiding quality design.) Objective LU-BB: Manage and plan for high quality residential growth in Renton and the Potential Annexation Area that: 1) Supports transit by providing uFban densities, 2) Promotes efficient land utilization, and 3) Creates stable neighborhoods incorporating built amenities and natural features. Policy LU-123. Pursue mUltiple strategies for residential growth including: 1) Development of new neighborhoods on larger land tracts on the hills and plateaus surrounding downtown; 2) Infill development on vacant and underutilized parcels in Renton's established neighborhoods; 3) Multi-family development located in Renton's Urban Center; 4) Infill in existing multi-family areas; and 5) Mixed-use projects and multi-family development in Commercial/Office/-Residential and Commercial Corridors. 19 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND U~ri ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LV-120. New plats adjacent to operating extractive sites should carry a notice on the face of the plat specifying the impacts that are expected from the extractive use: potential dust, noise, traffic, light and glare. Policy LV-I21. Hours of operation of extractive uses should be based on impacts to adjacent uses. Policy LV-122. The City should apply zoning or other approvals as appropriate for mineral extraction and processing following site-specific environmental study, sufficient public notice and comment opportunities when: 1) The proposed site contains rock, sand, gravel, coal, oil, gas, or other mineral resources, 2) The proposed site is large enough to confine or mitigate all operational impacts, 3) The proposal will allow operation with limited conflicts with adjacent land uses when mitigating measures are applied, and; 4) Roads or rail facilities serving or proposed to serve the site can safely and adequately handle transport of products and are in close proximity to the site. 18 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\E1ements.& Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/2512004 II :55 AM . CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 VII. RESOURCE LAND Goal: Maintain the City's agricultural and mining resources as part of Renton's cultural history. Discussion: Renton is an urban community with a rich history based on industrial and agricultural uses that is now transitioning into a vibrant urban center. Some agricultural resource-based uses remain in environmentally sensitive areas of the Potential Annexation Area and in Low Density Residential Designations or on vacant land in commercial areas. Current policies recognize these existing uses and encourage them as cultural resources. Objective LV-Z: Maintain existing commercial and hobby agricultural uses such as small farms, hobby farms, horticulture, beekeeping, kennels, and stables, that are compatible with urban development. ' Policy LV-Ill. Prohibit commercial agricultural uses Ulat are industrial or semi- industrial in nature, and create nuisances such as odor or noise that may be incompatible with residential use. Policy L V-112. Limit access of domestic animals to shorelines and wetlands. Policy LV-lB. Control impacts of crop and animal raising on surface and ground water. Policy LV-114. Encourage public and private recreational uses in agricultural areas. Policy LV-lIS. Allow accessory use for cultivation and sale of flowers, herbs, vegetables, or similar crops in residential areas. Policy LV-1l6. Recognize and allow community gardens on private property, vacant public property, and unused right-of-ways. Objective LV-AA: Maintain extractive industries where their continued operation does not impact adjacent residential areas, the City's aquifer, or other critical areas. Policy LV-1l7. Extractive industries including timber, sand, gravel and other mining within the City's Potential Annexation Area should be mapped and appropriately zoned upon annexation to the City. Policies governing these sites should be consistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. Policy LV-lIS. Mining and processing of minerals and materials should be allowed within the City subject to applicable City ordinances, environmental performance standards, and the policies in the King County Comprehensive Plan Section. Policy LV-1l9. Extractive sites, when mined out, should be regraded and restored for future development compatible with land use designations for adjacent sites. 17 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\E,lements & Vision\HpARING DRAFT\hd-La.'1d Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM ' CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-I04. When locating in predominantly residential areas, religious facilities should be on the periphery of the residential area rather than the interior. Policy LU-IOS. Parking should be provided on-site and buffered from adjacent uses. Policy LU-I06. Large-scale facilities should be encouraged to locate contiguous to an existing or planned transit route. Policy LU-I07. Religious facilities should be located on and have direct access to either. an arterial or collector street. Objective LU-Y: Accommodate large commercial recreation that dependson open land and is intended to serve consumer demands within a region. Policy L U-I 08. Commercial recreational uses should be located contiguous to a principal arterial in areas with immediate access to an interstate or a state route. Policy LU-I09. Commercial recreational uses should be located outside of the trade area. of other commercial recreational areas offering similar recreational opportunities. Policy LU-llO. Vehicular access to the site should be from a principal arterial street with the number of access points minimized. 16· H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Objective LU-V: Assure adequate land and infrastructure at appropriate locations for development and expansion of facilities to serve the educational needs of area residents and protect adjacent uses from impacts ofthese more intensive uses. Policy LU-94. Post secondary (beyond high school) and other regional educational facilities that require sites larger than fiv'e acres should be located in the Employment Area -Industrial, Employment Area -Valley, Commercial Office Residential, or the Urban Center designations. Policy LU-9S. Alternative funding sources (e.g. impact fees) should be explored for facilities necessitated by new development. Policy LU-96. Schools in residential neighborhoods should consider mitigating adverse impacts to the surrounding area in site planning and operations. Policy L U-97. The City and the school district should jointly develop multiple-use facilities (e.g. playgrounds, sports fields) whenever practical. Policy L U-98. Community use of school sites and facilities for non-school activities should be encouraged. Policy LU-99. Facilities, which are plalmed for closure, should be considered for potential public use before being sold for private development. Policy L U-I 00. Elementary schools should be located near a collector arterial street. Policy LU-IOt. Safe pedestrian access to schools should be promoted (e.g. through pedestrian linkages, safety features) thrqugh the design of new subdivisions and roadway improvements. Policy LU-I02. Vehicular access to middle schools, senior high schools and other large- scale facilities (e.g. bus maintenance shops, sports facilities) should be from arterial streets. Objective LU-W: Assure that adequate land and infrastructure are available for the development and expansion of facilities to serve the health care needs of the area. Policy LU-I03. Health and/or medical facilities larger than five acres should be located in portions of the Corridor Commercial ,designation mapped with Commercial Office zoning, Employment Area -Valley, CommerciaVOfficelResidential or the Urban Centers designations. Smaller scale facilities should locate in the Commercial Arterial portions of Corridor Commercial. Objective LU-X: Site religious and ancillary facilities in a manner that provides convenient transportation access and minimizes their adverse impacts on adjacent land uses. 15 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 812512004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-81. Public amenity features (e.g. plazas, trails, art work) should be incorporated into municipal projects. Policy LU-82. Municipal government functions that are people-intensive should be centrally located in or near the Urban Center. Policy LU-83. Fire stations should be located on principal or minor arterials. Policy LU-84. Future fire stations should be sited central to their service area with as few barriers as possible in order to achieve best possible response times. Policy L U-8S. Land for future fire stations should be acquired in advance in areas where the greatest amount of development is anticipated. Policy LU-86. Site and building design of police facilities providing direct service to the general public should be easily accessible. Policy LU-87. Major functions of the police should be centralized in or near the Urban Center. Policy LU-88. Satellite police facilities may be located outside of the Urban Center. Objective LU-T: Site and design regional facilities to provide the most efficient and convenient service for people while minimizing the adverse impacts on adjacent uses and the City Urban Center. Policy LU-89. Regional facilities that provide services on-site to the public on a daily basis (i.e. office uses) should be located in the City's Urban Center. Policy LU-90. Siting of regional facilities that are specialized (e.g. landfills, maintenance shops) or serve a limited segment of the popUlation (e.g. justice centers) should rely more strongly on the speciallocational needs of the facility and the compatibility of the facility with surrounding uses. Objective LU-U: Preserve the cultural amenities and heritage of Renton. Policy L U-91. The downtown library should continue to be the main facility for the City. Policy LU-92. When branch libraries are developed, they should be located to provide convenient access to a majority of their users. Policy LU-93. Future branch libraries and other satellite services may be located in mixed-use developments to serve concentrations of users in those areas. 14 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 I I :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 VI. PUBLIC FACILITIES Goal: Develop a system offacilities that meet the public and quasi-public service needs of present and future employees. Discussion: The purpose of these polides is to address the aspect of a public/quasi public use that is not addressed in the pertinent land use policies. Public facilities, also includes quasi-public uses such as cultural and religious facilities. Facilities discussed in this section vary widely in their size, function, service area, and impacts. For that reason, these policies are aimed at addressing the generic impacts of all of the facilities and the specific impacts of each. (Rent()n Technical College and Valley Medical Center are also addressed in the Corridor Commercial section of the Land Use Element.) Objective LU-R: Locate and plan for public facilities in ways that benefit a broad range of potential public uses. Policy LU-72. Facilities should be located within walking distance of an existing or planned transit stop. Policy L U-73. Primary vehicular access to sites should be from principal or minor arterials. Policy LU-74. Internal site circulation should be primarily pedestrian-oriented. Policy L U-75. Manage public lands to protect and preserve the public trust. Policy LU-76. Sites that are underused or developed with obsolete public uses should be considered for another public use prior to changing uses. Policy LU-77. Surplus sites should be considered for alternative types of public use prior to sale or lease. Policy LU-7S. A public involvement process should be established to review proposals to change uses of surplus public properties. Policy LU-79. Guide and modify development of essential public facilities to meet Comprehensive Plan policies and to mitigate impacts and costs to the City. Policy LU-SO. Use public processes and create criteria to identify essential public facilities. Public processes should include notification, hearings, and citizen involvement. Criteria should be developed to review and assess proposals for public facilities. Objective LU-S: Site and design municipal facilities to provide the most efficient and convenient service for people while minimizing adverse impacts on surrounding uses. , 13 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND U::m'ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-71. Evaluate applications to repair or expand non-confonning structures based on the following factors: 1) Whether it represents a unique regional or national architectural style or an illl1ovation in architecture, use of materials, or functional arrangement, and/or is one of the few remaining examples of this; 2) Whether it is part of a unified streetscape of similar structures that is unlikely to be replicated, unless the subject structure is rebuilt per, or similar to, its original plan; 3) Whether redevelopment ofthe site with a confonning structure is unlikely; and 4) The structure has been well-maintained and is not considered to be a threat to the publIC health, welfare, or safety, or it could be retrofitted so as not to pose such a threat. 12 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 v. NON-CONFORMING USE Goal: Pursue the transition of non-conforming uses and structures to encourage more conforming uses and development patterns. Objective LU-P: Evaluate requests for.rebuilding of non-conforming uses beyond normal maintenance where they can be made more conforming and are compatible with their surroundings. Policy LU-67. Encourage compatibility between non-conforming uses and structures and conforming uses in neighborhoods that have significant numbers of non-conforming uses. Policy LU-68. Encourage developments that increase the number of conforming uses and structures. Policy LU-69. Transition of uses and structures from non-conforming to those that conform to zoning and development sta:p.dards should be implemented in a manner that recognizes the overall character ofthe n.eighborhood. Policy LU-70. Evaluate permits for non-conforming uses, based on the following criteria: 1) Relationship of the existing non-copforming use or structure to its surroundings; 2) The compatibility of the non-conforming use with its context and other uses in the area; 3) Demonstrated community need for the use at its present location; 4) Over-concentration of the use within the City or within the area; 5) Suitability of the existing location; 6) Demonstration that the use has not resulted in undue adverse effects on adjacent properties from noise, traffic, glare, vibration, etc., (i.e., does not exceed normal levels in these areas emanating from surrounding permitted uses); 7) Whether the use was associated with a historical event or activity in the community and as a result has historical significance; 8) Whether the use provides substanthll benefit to the community because of either the employment of a large number of people in the community or whether it generates considerable revenues to the City; and 9) Whether retention of the use would not impede or delay the implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan due to current market conditions. Objective LU-Q: Ensure that the effects of non-conforming structures on character of the conforming patterns of Renton's neighborhoods are minimized. 11 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & VisionlliEARlNG DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USEELEMENT 8-20-04 IV. mSTORICAL AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES Goal: Maintain the City's natural and cultural history by documenting and a ro riately reco nizing its historic and/or archaeolo ical sites. Objective LU-O: Communicate Renton's history by protecting historic and archaeological sites and structures when appropriate and as opportunities arise. Policy LU-61. Historic resources should continue to be identified and mapped within the City as an on-going process. Policy LU-62. Natural and cultural resources should be identified by project proponents when applying for land use approval, as part ofthe application submitted for review. Policy LU-63. Potentially adverse impacts on cultural resources deemed to be significant should be mitigated as a condition ofproject approval. Policy LU-64. The City should work cooperatively with King County by exchanging resource information pertaining to natural and cultural resources .. Policy LU-6S. Historical and archaeological sites, identified as significant by the City of Renton, should be preserved and/or incorporated into development projects. Policy LU-66. Downtown buildings and sites should be encouraged to display information about Renton's history, including prominent families and individuals, businesses, and events associated with downtown's past. 10 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM _f CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 consistent with the Comprehensive Plan policies or other City of Renton development standards. Policy LU-S1. Urban development within Renton's Potential Annexation Area should not occur without annexation unless there is an interlocal agreement with King County defining land use, zoning, annexation phasing, urban services, street and other design standards, and impact mitigation requirements. Policy LU-S2. Long-range planning and the development of capital improvement programs for transportation, storm water, water, and sewer services should be coordinated with adjacent jurisdictions, special districts, and King County. Policy LU-S3. Interlocal agreements with other jurisdictions should be pursued to develop solutions to regional concerns including, but not limited to water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage, utility drainage basins, transportation, park and open space, development review, and public safety. Objective LU-N: Provide full and complete evaluation of annexation proposals by relevant departments and divisions upon the submission ofthe annexation proposal. Policy LU-S4. Appropriate zoning districts should be designated for property in an annexation proposal. Zoning in the ann'exation territory should be consistent with the comprehensive plan land use designations. Policy LU-SS. Larger annexations should be encouraged, when appropriate, in order to realize efficiencies in the use of City resources. Policy LU-S6. Annexations should be expanded if they include areas surrounded by the City on three or more sides or if they include properties with recorded covenants to annex. Policy LU-S7. The City should respond to community initiatives and actively assist owners and residents with initiating and completing the annexation process. Policy LU-S8. The City should ensure that property owners and residents in and around the affected area(s) are notified of the obligations and requirements that may be imposed upon them as a result of annexation. ' Policy LU-S9. The City should work with potential annexation proponents to develop acceptable annexation boundaries. Policy LU-60. The City should conduct a fiscal impact assessment of the costs to provide service and of the tax revenues that would be generated in the area. The City recognizes that fiscal impacts are only one of many criteria to be evaluated, and must be balanced with other annexation policy goals such as protection of sensitive areas, providing public service, governmental structure, or infrastructure, and aquifer protection. 9 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\J-IEARING DRAF1\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USEJELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-42. Support annexations of lower density areas where it would protect natural resources or provide urban separator areas. Objective LU-K: Create city boundaries through annexations that facilitate the efficient delivery of,emergency and public services. Policy LU-43. The proposed annexation boundary should be defined by the following characteristics: 1) Annexation of territory that is adjacent to the existing City limits; in general, the more land adjacent to the City the more favorable the annexation; 2) Inclusion of unincorporated islands and peninsulas; 3) Use of natural or manmade boundaries that are readily identifiable in the field, such as wetlands, waterways, ridges, park property, roads/freeways, and railroads; 4) Inclusion/exclusion of an entire neighborhood, rather than dividing portions ofthe neighborhood between City and County jurisdictions; and 5) Inclusion of natural corridors either as greenbelts or urban separators between the City and adj acent jurisdictions. Policy LU-44. Existing land uses, development, and redevelopment potential should be considered when evaluating a proposed annexation. Policy LU-4S. Commercial uses that do not conform to Renton's land use plan should be encouraged to transition on to conforming uses. Illegal uses not listed under King County zoning should be required to cease and desist upon annexation. Policy LU-46. Annexation proposals should include areas that would result in City control over land uses along major entrance corridors to the City ("Gateways"). Policy LU-47. Boundaries of individual annexations will not be reconsidered to exclude reluctant property owners, if the annexation is consistent with land use, environmental protection policies, and the efficient delivery of services. Objective LU-L: Protect the environmental quality of Renton by annexing lands where future development and land use activity could otherwise adversely impact natural and urban systems. Policy LU-48. Shoreline Master Program land use designations, including those for associated wetlands, should be established during the annexation process. Policy LU-49. Annexations should be pursued in areas that lie within existing, emerging, or prospective aquifer recharge zones, that currently or potentially supply domestic water to the City and are within Renton's Potential Annexation Area. Policy LU-50. Zoning should be applied to areas for purposes of resource protection, when appropriate, during the annexation process. Objective LU-M: Promote a regional approach for development review through the use of interlocal agreements to ensure that land development policies in King County are 8 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM . j CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 III. ANNEXATIONS I Goal: Actively pursue annexations. Objective LU-I: Support annexation of county areas that are identified as being within the City of Renton's Potential Annexation Area and can be efficiently provided with infrastructure and City services, are urban separators, or have environmental constraints. Policy LU-3S. The City should continue to recognize that it has an inherent interest in future land use decisions affecting its Potential Annexation Area. Policy LU-36. Encourage annexation where the availability of infrastructure and services allow for the development of urban densities. Renton should be the primary service provider of urban infrastructure and public services in its Potential Annexation Area, provided that the City can offer such services in an efficient and cost-effective manner. Policy LU-37. The highest priority areas for annexation to the City of Renton should be those contiguous with the boundaries oithe City such as: 1) Peninsulas and islands of unincorporated land where Renton is the logical service provider; 2) Neighborhoods where municipal services have already been extended; 3) Lands subject to development pressure that might benefit from City Development Standards; 4) Developed areas where urban services are needed to correct degradation of natural resources, such as aquifer recharge areas; 5) Lands that are available for urbanization under county comprehensive plan, zoning, and subdivision regulations; and 6) Developed areas where Renton is able to provide basic urban services and local governance to an existing population. Objective LU-J: Promote annexations that would maintain the quality of life in the re- sultant City of Renton, making the City a good place to work, live, play, shop, and raise families. Policy LU-38. Support annexations that would result in future improvements to City services or eliminate duplication by service providers. Services include water, sanitary sewer, storm water drainage, utility drainage basins, transportation, park and open space, library, and public safety. Policy LU-39. Support annexations that complement the jobs and housing goals adopted in the Regional Growth Strategy. Policy LU-40. Support annexations that would simplify governmental structure by consolidating multiple services under a single or reduced number of service providers. Policy LU-41. Promote annexations of developed areas with a residential population already using City services or impacting City infrastructure. 7 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-27. Residential use andlor density should be limited, within the Runway Protection Zone and the Runway Sideline Zone, to reduce negative impacts on residents from aviation operation noise. Policy LU-28. Non-residential use andlor intensity may be limited, if such uses are deemed to be noise sensitive, to reduce negative impacts on users from aviation operation nOIse. Policy LU~29. Approval of residential land use or other land uses where noise-sensitive activities may occur should require dedication of avigation easements and use of acoustic materials for structures. Policy LU-30. Require master planning ofland to increase land use compatibility through sound attenuation in the environment and techniques such as: • Place uses with highest sensitivity to noise at greater distances, in consideration of the factor of distance from the source. • Consider creation of micro-climates to utilize mitigating meteorological conditions (i.e. air temperature, wind direction and velocity). • Create soft ground surfaces, such as vegetative ground cover, rather than hard surfaces. • Provide at appropriate heights, structures, terrain, or other barriers to provide attenuation of sound. Overflight Objective LU-H: In the Airport Influence Area, address impacts of overflight that are disruptive. Policy LU-31. At the time ofland use approval (i.e. subdivision ofland) avigation easements should be granted to the City in areas of Renton subject to negative aircraft overflight impacts. Policy LU-32. At the time ofland use approval (i.e. subdivision ofland) deed notices should be recorded in areas of Renton subject to negative aircraft overflight impacts. Policy LU-33. The City should establish a presence on noise-abatement review committees, or similar, and request notification of noise-abatement procedures at nearby airports that may have aircraft that impact Renton. Policy LU-34. The City should provide information to Renton citizens of noise complaint procedures to follow for reporting negative impacts from overflights associated with not only Renton Airport, but also Seattle Tacoma International Airport and King County International Airport. 6 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFnhd-Land Use.docLast' printed 812512004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 II. AIRPORT AIRPORT COMPATIBLE LAND USE POLICIES Goal: Minimize risk associated with po,tential aircraft incidents on the ground and for aircraft occupants. General Aviation Safety Objective LU-E: Minimize risk associated with potential aircraft accidents. Policy LU-19. Adopt an airport compatible land use program for the Renton Airport Influence Area, including an Airport Influence Area Map. Policy LU-20. Develop performance-based criteria for land use compatibility with aviation activity. Policy LU-21. In the Airport Influence 'Area, adopt use restrictions, as appropriate, that meet or exceed basic aviation safety considerations. Airspace Protection Objective LU-F: Reduce obstacles to aviation in proximity to Renton Municipal Airport. Policy LU-22. Require that submittal requirements for proposed land use actions disclose potential conflicts with airspace. Policy LU-23. Provide maximum protection to Renton airspace from obstructions to aviation. Policy LU-24. Prohibit buildings, structures, or other objects from being constructed or altered so as to project or otherwise penetrate the airspace surfaces, except as necessary and incidental to airport operations. ' Aviation Noise Objective LU-G: Address impacts of aviation noise that is at a level deemed to be a health hazard or disruptive of noise-sensitive activities. Policy LU-2S. Prohibit the location of noise-sensitive land uses from areas of high noise levels, defined by the 65 DNL (or higher) noise contour of the Renton Municipal Airport. Policy LU-26. Within the Airport Influence Area require disclosure notice for potential negative impacts from aviation operation and noise, unless mitigated by other measures. 5 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM " CITY OFRENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 will increase the discrepancy between jobs and housing units within the City. However, the number of housing units in the unincorporated areas within Renton IS Potential Annexation Area are expected to grow faster than jobs so that the balance of jobs to housing will be maintained within the City limits and the potential annexation areas. 4 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM ~ CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-H. Minimum density requirements shall be established to ensure that land development practices utilize enough capacity to meet adopted growth targets and create greater efficiency in the provision of urban services. Policy LU-l2. Minimum density requirements should: 1) Be based on net density; 2) Not be applied to lots created after 1995 ofless than one acre in size; 3) Not be required of individual portioq.s or lots within the project; 4) May be reduced due to lot configuration, lack of access, or physical constraints; and 5) Not be applied to construction of a single dwelling unit on a pre-existing legal lot or renovation of existing structures. Policy LU-13. Phasing, shadow-platting, or land reserves should be used to ensure that minimum density can eventually be achieved within proposed developments. Adequate access to potential future development on the site must be ensured. Proposed development should not preclude future development. Policy LU-l4. Parking should not be considered as a land reserve for future development, except within the Urban Center. Policy LU-lS. Amend capacity estimates as annexation and re-zonings occur. Objective LU-D: Maintain a high ratio of jobs to housing in Renton. Policy LU-l6. Future residential and employment growth within Renton's planning area should meet the goal of 2 jobs per 1 housing unit. Policy LU-l7. Sufficient quantities oflandshould be designated to accommodate the desired single family/multi-family mix outside the Urban Center, and provide for commercial and industrial uses necessary to provide for expected job growth. Policy LU-lS. Small-scale home occupations that provide opportunities for people to work in their homes should be allowed in residential areas. Standards should govern the design, size, intensity, and operation of such uses to ensure their compatibility with residential uses. Discussion: The ratio of new jobs to new housing units will affect the future character of the City. Renton currently is an employment center with a high jobs/housing ratio characterized by a high level of day-time activity, a high demand for infrastructure, a high tax base, and a high level of commuter traffic. . Renton's current ratio of jobs to housing units is roughly 2.1 jobs per 1 housing unit. Within King County, the overall ratio is about 1.5 jobs per 1 housing unit. Forecasts from the Puget Sound Regional Council indicate that there will be an even greater number of new jobs within Renton than new housing over the next 20 years. This 3 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM CITY OF RENTON LAND USt ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy LU-3. Provide for land use planning and an overall growth strategy for both the City and land in the ~~signated P AA as part of Renton's regional growth policies . . :Ivi\'''~·?{~~/:)/· ,·i::~ . Discus~'ibn: The Growth Management Act and the Countywide Planning Policies establis~,:ulb{tn",ifo'~th areas where urban levels of growth will occur within the subsequent 20-yeq,rp.eriod. These areas include existing cities and unincorporated areas, wi.tfilA 1the T::frb~'n Growth Area, the Potential Annexation Area (P AA) is designated for future municipal expansion and governance. Policies guiding annexation and provision of services within the P AA are also located in the annexation portion of the Land Use Element; Utilities Element; Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Element and Transportation Element. Objective LU-B: Evaluate and implement growth targets consistent with the Growth Management Act and Countywide Planning Policies. Policy LU-4. Adopt the following growth targets for the period from 2002 to 2022, consistent with the targets adopted for the region by the Growth Management Planning Council for the 2002 Renton City limits and Potential Annexation Areas: I) City of Renton Housing: 6,198 units 2) City of Renton Jobs: 27,597 jobs 3) Potential Annexation Area Housing 1,976 units 4) Potential Annexation Area Jobs: 458jobs Policy LU-S. Amend growth targets as annexation occurs to transfer a proportionate share of Potential Annexation Area targets into Renton's targets. Policy LU-6. Monitor targets through the City's Outcome Management evaluation process. Objective LU-C: Ensure sufficient land capacity to accommodate forecast housing and job growth and targets mandated by the Growth Management Act for the next twenty years (2002-2022). Policy LU-7. Land use capacity should be estimated based on an assumption that the average development project will achieve 80% of maximum density. Policy LU-S. Provide sufficient land, appropriately zoned, so capacity exceeds targets by at least twenty percent (20%). Policy LU-9. Encourage infill development as a means to increase capacity for single- family units within the existing city limits. . Policy LU-'10. Use buildable lands data and market analysis to establish adopted capacity for either jobs or housing within each adopted zoning classification. 2 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & VisionlliEARING DRAFT\hd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 II :55 AM , CITY OF RENTON LAND USE ELEMENT 8-20-04 NOTE: BECAUSE THE LAND USE ELEMENT HAS BEEN EXTENSIVELY REVISED, THE ELEMENT IS CONSIDERED NEW. DEVELOPME . CITV OF ~1~~%'VlNG LAND USE ELEMENT I. REGIONAL GROWTH POLICIES AUG 2 6 200~ RECEIVED Goal: Plan for future growth of the Urban Area based on regionally developed growth forecasts, adopted growth targets, and land capacity as determined through implementation of the Growth Management Act. Discussion: "Capacity" is the room for growth provided by the plan. Targets are the politically determined share of growth assigned to each community in the region through the Countywide Planning Policies. Forecasts are the expected growth in the City based on regional employment and population modeling. The objective of this plan is to appropriately analyze regionally generated estimates of both forecast growth and targets and align those estimates with Renton's desire for economic growth and development. Renton has the local land use authority to provide suffiCient capacity to meet and exceed both targets and forecast growth. Excess capacity can encourage sprawl and discourage redevelopment, while insufficient capacity can make it more difficult for the market to work. The Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan should provide sufficient direction to achieve a balance between £?=cessive and insufficient capacity, in order to avoid difficulty in implementing the Plan. Objective LU-A: Plan for future urban development in the Renton Urban Growth Area (UGA) including the existing City and the unincorporated areas identified in Renton's Potential Annexation Areas (P AA). ' Policy LU-I. Continue to refine the boundary of the Urban Growth Area (UGA) in cooperation with King County, based on the following criteria: 1) The UGA provides adequate land capacity for forecast growth; 2) Lands within the UGA are appropriate for urban development; and 3) Urban levels of service are required for existing and proposed land uses. Policy LU-2. Designate Potential Annexation Areas (PAAs) as those portions of unincorporated King County outside the existing City limits, but within the Urban Growth Area, where: I) Renton can logically provide urban services over the planning period; 2) Land use patterns support implementation of Renton's Urban Center objectives; and 3) Development meets overall standards for quality identified for city neighborhoods. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & VisionlliEARING DRAFTlhd-Land Use.docLast printed 8/25/2004 11 :55 AM It is understood that, with other factors, the quality of the environment is dependent on the reliability and efficiency of existing utility systems, in order to protect the public health and safety and minimize impacts. High lev,els of service 'are maintained, while the cost of implementation is shared in an equitable manner. Basic to Renton's Vision is the concept that urban living provides both choice and balanced opportunities for residents; employment and housing, recreation and religion, goods and services, all available in the community. To this end, the City has a responsibility to ensure availability of adequate land capacity so that both the employment and economic base can be expanded and diversified. Policies encourage expansion of development in the Valley and redevelopment within the Urban Center to broaden the City's employment and economic base. Fundamental to the Vision is a revitalized Downtown Core, within the Urban Center, that functions as a living Iworking I entertainment area for both the community as a whole and for a "24 hour Downtown population." The City will continue to work to bring a balance of uses, consisting of retail and other commercial, office, light industrial, and residential into the Downtown. Redevelopment of the south Lake Washington neighborhood, within the "Urban Center -North," will contribute to the renewed vitality of the Downtown Core. The Urban Center-North, used for heavy industrial manufacturing and associated parking for more than 60 years, offers the potential for an expanded Urban Center that will become a regional focus. The City of Renton's Vision is ambitious and far-sighted. It is the underlying structure for policies that strengthen the character of a City that entered its second century with renewed energy, ready to capitalize on fresh opportunities. 4 t " To further the goal of a more compact city, and still maintain the balance between single-and multi-family housing, there is an objective to increase the supply of single-family housing through infill development. Some of this single- family infill will occur in newly annexed areas of the City, as a way to meet the desired single/multi-family housing mix and provide efficient urban services. There is, however, a corresponding objective to restrict expansion of traditional multi-family housing in outlying areas and channel mixed-use/multi-family into Centers. By this means, sufficient land capacity to accommodate future growth, including Renton's share of projected regional housing needs, will be ensured while maintaining the quality of life in both new and established neighborhoods. A significant characteristic of the neighborhoods of Renton is their multi-level diversity. Most neighborhoods include households that vary from one another in age range or generation, economic level, and place of origin or nationality. In order to respect and protect this quality, the City must allow for a full range of housing types to accommodate the diverse population, from larger, "move up" homes to smaller scale single-family, multi-family, and condominium developments, as well as to traditional single-family houses. A goal is to enhance the present character of the City and improve the quality of life. This must be done on several levels. On a community level, City policies support activities that strengthen neighborhood cohesiveness. The energy of a neighborhood that strives for a greater "sense of community" by meeting and working together can lead to amenities that make the area more attractive or improve its function as a neighborhood center. The result is a better place to live, work, and play. On a project level, high quality is a function of development standards. On the broadest level, the City policies ensure that urbanization, economic development, and natural area protection are balanced. The unique setting of the City of Renton was recognized as "advantageous" from its earliest days. Its situation on the shore of Lake Washington,its hilltop views of the expanses of the lake, Mt. Rainier, the Cascades and Olympic Mountains, tree shrouded slopes, natural wildlife corridors, valley neighborhoods, and the clear water of the Cedar River and the many creeks and streams that run through the City are deeply appreciated by its residents. There is an abiding commitment to protect, restore, and enhance environmental quality within the City. Likewise, there is a desire to ensure quality parks and adequate open space within this environment to meet the recreational needs of residents. 3 .~., ..... . ,', I:' ~ , ' 1. ~ '0 :"j '.~, '.::' '. The Vi~~~:~\~~~~;~~:;'!ve, work, and play," stand for much more- • A community that is healthy and safe, that has cohesive, well-established neighborhoods and a growing diversity of housing to match the diversity of the population with its various needs and wants • A working town with a full spectrum of employment opportunities for all economic segments, regardless of education, age, gender, or ethnic origin • A regional center for active and passive recreation that features access for all to a healthy river, a clean lake, and clear mountain views to enhance the experience Renton has a city government, business community, and citizens infused with a passionate belief that it is the best place to be. They also have the will, desire, and resources to nurture the qualities that make it that and to make it even better . in the future. That is the Vision. . The Renton Mission states, unequivocally, the responsibility of the City, "in partnership with residents, businesses, and schools" to take the steps necessary to fulfill the Vision. These include: • Providing a healthy atmosphere to live and raise families, • Encouraging responsible growth and promoting economic vitality, • Creating a positive community work environment, and • Meeting service demands through innovation and commitment to excellence. The Business Plan Goals, with the Vision and Mission, form the basis for City objectives and policies. The Goals are adopted annually by the City Council. Each year objectives and implementing policies of the Comprehensive Plan are checked against current goals and objectives. The resulting adjustments are formed into annual amendments to the Comprehensive Plan. Current policies of the Comprehensive Plan direct future growth to the Urban Center, the core of an economically healthy, working city, and to mixed-use "centers" created outside of the downtown. Although densities of development are based on user preference and market factors, policies encourage maximum land efficiency, even outside the Urban Center, and strive for development that is more intense than typical "suburban" prototypes. Ideally, the centers will result in a reduction of transportation impacts within the City by allowing residents to work and shop close to where they live, in both new and well-established neighborhoods, thereby providing alternatives to single- occupant vehicles, and maintaining a balance between parking supply and demand. 2 , ) RENTON ENVISIONING OUR CITY Introduction 'ElOPMENT PLANNfNG CITY OF RENTON AUG 2 6.200~ RECEIVED· Some cities are locked in time, inhospitable to change, but the City of Renton is not such a place. The engineered disappearance of the Black River, a major waterway to the earliest community, and the economic downturn that resulted in the closing of Renton's timber mill and coal mines, once thriving industries, are . but a few examples of the evolution of Renton. Strategic planning announced by the Boeing Company, a primary industry for more than half the City's lifetime, will bring economic diversification and phxsical modification to the City. Until the mid-twentieth century, the Renton community took change as it came and coped with its consequences as they arose. In 1965, however, "planning for the future" was initiated with the adoption of the City's first Comprehensive Plan. Twenty-five years later, major evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan was initiated. It culminated in the first comprehensive plan to meet the requirements of the 1990 Growth Management Act (GMA). Periodic review of Comprehensive Plan goals and policies, mandated by GMA, provides the City with the opportunity to factor in changes in the community and make adjustments to reflect the objectives of the administration. I The foundation of the Comprehensive Plan is a "Vision" of how Renton will look and function in the future, a "Mission" that states the responsibility for meeting the Vision, and "Business Plan Goals" that delineate how the Mission can be met. The implemented Comprehensive Plan, associated Land Use Map, Zoning, Development Standards, and programmatic plans for transportation, utilities, housing, parks and recreation facilities, will result in a fully realized Vision of the City. Vision The Vision for the City is simply stated'-"Renton: A world-class city where people choose to live, work, and play." These few words are intended to provide a representation of how the City views itself at the present time and into the future. The words communicate both truths about, and hopes for, the City of Renton. Renton meets a humanistic interpretation of "world class," that is, a city that has a quality of life enjoyed by its citizens. Renton has a quality of life of the highest caliber. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 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 City-wide 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 of the 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. Implementation, mMonitoring, and evaluation aspects of the City of Renton's Concurrency Management System and Transportation Concurrency Regulations will be reviewed as part of ongoing transportation work. 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 T -WX: Protect and promote clean air to ensure a healthful environment. T-XY: Reduce vehicular emissions by encouraging increases in carpooling, vanpooling, transit, and non- motorized transportation usage. T -¥~: Ensure the long-term protection of the quality of water resources of the City of Renton. T -ZAA: Reduce the impact on water quality from vehicular pollutants associated with run-off from impervious transportation facility surfaces. T-AABB: Preserve and protect natural resources (particularly critical areas and wildlife habitat). Policies Policy T -'S69. Promote programs which maintain mobile source pollutant levels at or below those prescribed by the EPA, State Department of Ecology, and the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency. Policy T -,<}70. Comply with the stipulations described in the State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance. Policy T -'+71. Promote water quality by encouraging increases in carpooling, vanpooling, transit and non-motorized transportation usage. II-Ill Policy T -'872. Incorporate in transportation facilities vehicular pollutant and surface water run-off management and treatment techniques that maximize water quality. Policy T-6973. Comply with the stipulations described in federal, state and local water quality standards and regulations. Policy T-+074. Develop transportation plans and projects to comply with City, State and federal regulations that address critical areas and wildlife habitat. CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Also see related Policies in the Enviromnental Section of the Land Use Element and King County Countywide Planning Policies CA 14 and CA 15, which by this reference are incorporated in this Chapter. AIR QUALITY Non attainment Areas Non attainment areas in the Paget Sound Region refer to the six criteria pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, small particulates (PM 10), lead, sulfur dioxide, and 'lolatile organic compounds) being at or below acceptable standards. These pollutants are released into the air from point (stationary, site specific), non point (stationary, large area), and mobile (vehicular: car, train, boat) sources. The State Department of Ecology (DOE) estimates that motor vehicles contribute approximately 55 % of all air pollution in the Paget Sound region. The pollutants in non attairnnent of state and Federal air quality guidelines in the Paget Sound Region are carbon monoxide, ozone and PM 10. Air quality non attainment areas are defined by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as areas that have pollutant levels exceeding the maximum ambient standards set forth by the agency. Air pollution is regulated by the Federal Clean Air Act of 1990 and the Clean Air Washington Act of 1991. Agency control is enforced by the EPA (Federal), Washington State Department of Ecology (state) and the local agency, Paget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA). Each of these ageneies has established criteria pollutant standards for the Paget Sound region. Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide (CO) is a colorless, odorless, toxic gas formed when carbon based fuels are incompletely burned. CO emissions contribute the largest 'rolume share of air pollutant emissions in the United States. Mobile sources are the largest contributor of carbon monoxide pollution in the Paget Sound area, aeeounting for 55 to 60%. The maximum allo't't'able carbon monoxide standard for each of the three governing ageneies is 9 parts per million (ppm) for an average hour during an 8 hour period and 35 ppm for a 1 hour a'rerage period. Vehicles emit 'larious levels of CO dependent upon their operating eondition. Vehlcles traveling along arterials or aeeelerating from stops emit relatively low amounts of CO, while interseetion stop delay (idling) and vehicle deceleration contribute significantly higher CO output. Intersection stop delay reduction would improve Renton I s air quality. There are currently no PSAPCA carbon monoxide monitoring stations within the City of Renton. The closest station is located in downtown Bellevue. This station recorded no CO 'liolations during 1991. Since attainment and non attainment. are regional concerns, Renton is considered within a non attainment area for carbon monoxide pollution. The Paget Sound non attainment area covers most of the urban area between E'lerett and Tacoma, and during 1991, two 'r'iolations were recorded. I Ozone is a pungent smelling, colorless gas produced by chemical reactions between nitrous oxides and hydrocarbons in the presence of sunlight. Ozone generally forms downwind of the pollutant source, therefore, the concentrations are fOOnd in the foothills of the Cascades. The ozone standard is 0.12 ppm for a 24 hour concentration and attairnnent is defined as an a'rerage of one or less days per year in excess of this value for a three year period. II-Il2 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Motor ',ehkle SQ\Kces accOOBt for roughly 50% of ozone generated in the Puget SOl:lBd region. Ozone coosing mtrous oxide emissions are produced by travel actions relati',ely opposite from carbon monoxide's. High mtrous oxide (and ultimately ozone) production is caused by acceleratioa and low levels are produced while idling or decelerating. Arterial travel is not a high ozone generator. As with CO, ozone levels would be reduced by contimIously moving traffic, with redl:lctions ia the HI:lmber of vehicle stops. Ozone violatioas have been most commoa at the Enumclav.' momtoring statioa. For the three year period, 1989 1991, 3.8 days were in violation for an average of 1. 3 days per year. DmiHg both 1989 and 1991, no violations were recorded at any of the fol:lr PSAPCA momtoring sites. Particl:llates Suspended particulate matter are defiaed as small airborne particles up to 10 microns in diameter, tlmsthe designatioa PM 10. These particles are from sources suell as road dust, soot, oils, aBEl either airbome particles which can be indefimtely suspeBEled. PartiClllates are point sOl:lfce concerns, aBEl no violations have beea recorded in Remoa. B.ased upon natioaal statistics, gasoline aBEl diesel vehicles coatribHte approximately 15 % of suspeBEled particl:llate matter. AIR QUALITY Severity of Violations PSAPCA's 1991 Air Quality Data Summary iBElicates that air 'luality has impro',ed over the past 10 . years. The first three years of the past decade (1981 1983) had 83 days of violatioas (Hnhealthful days) within the three major cities: everett, Seattle aBd Tacoma. The last three years (1989 1991) have seen only mae unhealthful days. Seattle, which had recorded 515 violatioas during the first period, had aOBe dllFing the close of the decade. Two polll:ltaats have beea listed as the violatioa pollutant for the worst air 'luality day of year for the past decade. These pollutaats are CO aBEl PM 10. Overall, the violations have lesseaed with time. No direct readiags of conditioas ia Reatoa are possible because aD moaitoriag statioas are located ia the City. The closest momtoriag statioHS aad their highest recorded pollHtaat values for 1991 were as foUo' .... s. The BeUe'llle CO momtoriag station's poorest readiag for an 8 hour average was 7.5 ppm, 17% below the acceptable threshold. The Ravensdale ozoae monitoriag station's highest reading was 0.101 ppm or 115% below the allowable maximHm. Two PM 10 stations, Dl:lwamish and Keat are nearly e€J:llidistaat from Rentoa, therefore both were checked. The Dl:lwamish high readiag was 143 Itg/m~ (5 % below violatioa) and the Kem reading was 14 6 Itg/m~ (3 % below violatioa) . . Based upon the above iaformatioa, it is not believed that Reaton is in violatioa of any of the criteria pollHtaats. While the City does not haye any specific aoa attaimneat areas due to traasportation related SOl:lrces, the City is committed to reduciag mobile source air poUutioa. AIR QUALITYAir 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. 1I-1l3 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORT A TION ELEMENT Revised ~8/17/04 Ongoing transportation planning work will include the review of the latest information from state and local a~encies 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 tum, will reduce vehicular pollutants and their effect on water quality. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Transportation problems are not a local phenomenon. 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 inter jurisdictional 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 will participate participates in regional forums and support 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 SOY 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. 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-BBCC: _Coordinate transportation operations, planning and improvements with other transportation authorities and municipalities. II-1l4 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Policies Policy T -1-175. A sub-regional transportation system should be designed and implemented in cooperation with neighboring jurisdictions. Policy T ~76. 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 -+J77. The Regional Transit Plan (RTP) should include regional express bus service to downtown Renton. Policy T-+478. 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-1-S79. 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-USO. The City of Renton. in collaboration with King County Transit (Metro), in collaboration with tHe City of Renton. should place high priority in providing transit service to areas experiencing high residential and commercial growth. Policy T-++81. The Regional Transit Authority (SoundTransit) 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-82. 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 fomins. (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 11-115 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Committee and Renton staff serve on the Steering Committee and Technical Committee. The purpose of the study is to work with local jurisdictions to define transportation needs in the 1-405 Corridor from Tukwila to Swamp Creek, and to develop transportation improvement projects for the corridor that compliment local plans, goals, and objectives. ' Regional Coordination South County Area Transportation Board (SCATBDSCA TBd). 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 (PSRC), 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 aCe working with Sound Transit tcr.-l1-implement Phase 1 of the 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; and, 2) begin planning for Phase 2, which may incmde light rail service to Renton. County Coordination King County Metro. The City is also coordinating with King County Transit (Metro) in the development of local bus service plans which 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 11-116 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 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 10calCTR 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. 11-117 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Also s~e relateaPoliCies·iHthe:.lr~it'Se6tlp~;~~ift~i~p~~q~iitY:~~~tfPl~~~P.~~i~&::t~~:;··.:::i:·:::~';Ai; 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 of the 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; 3.3. Light rail service to urban ana employment centers including RentonHigh Capacity Transit (HCT) to urban and employment centers, including Renton;t 4J. 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 of the 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 refmement 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) Determine procedures as needed for design level application of the nevI LOS policy and standards. Continue to refine and update Renton's LOS policy to reflect new information on regional and local transportation plans. For other tasks related to Level of Service see 8.6 Concurrency later in this section. II-1l8 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Arterial Plan Conduct further analysis of the 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 Stt:Klyanalysis. Re-evaluate residential, commercial, and industrial access street function definitions and classifications. Transit RegiaBallA ... eeessibility Update the assessment of the Regional Transit Plan (Sound Move) and its implications for Renton. Transit Plan Update and revise Renton's Transit Plan to reflect new information regarding the Regional Transportation Plan (Sound Move). Conduct further analysis of the 6 year, 2010 and 20 year local feeder system transit improvements identified in the City of Renton Transit Plan Support DocumentNeeds Assessment in order to verify operational and financial feasibility. (Includes the development and incorporation of more detailed bus routing and dial-a-ride needs.) Made Split Contiooe to update auto occupaneies and future mode splits for the Renton Transit Plan. Revise the Transit Plan and (local service and regional components), as appropriate. Level of Service Continue to refine the transit index of Renton's LOS standard to address transit service frequency and, if needed, for design level application. 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 HOVimprovements, and define scope and cost of the proposed improvements in more detail, as appropriate. Level of Service Continue to re.fine--update the HOV index of Renton's LOS standards for design level application, if needed. Non-motorized Neighborhood and Regional Access 11-119 I CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Reassess theBased on the ~City of Renton Comprehensive Walk ~f!rogram ReportCitywide Walkway ~, and bicycle and pedestrian access needs in light of transit service decisions. Determine 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 Rentori parking policies to complement other elements of the 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 Obtain updated information on how Renton employers intend to meet CTR goals and, wWith assistance from King County, evaluate the-updated Renton employers CTR data and update revise citywide employer mode split if needed. ' TDM/CTR Programs Renton's CTR ordinance was adopted amended ~n February, -l-9W1998. 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. 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 nwiew update the goals, objectives,; policies, functional requirements, and implementation strategies of the Airport Master Plan, completed in 1997, and propose revisions if needed to the goals, objectives, airport facility suP/ey, functional requirements, aRd implementation strategy items. Update the Airport Chapter of the 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 II-120 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORT A TION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 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 cost of the 10 year and 20 year transportation programs, and the scope and cost of improvements determined from the continued feasibility analysis of the 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 of the 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 of the 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 identified projects or programs. Include appropriate projects and programs in the City'S 6-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 of the 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. Re'/iew of the CMS will comprise of the following items: Leyel of Service (LOS) policy and standards. Established parameters to determine whether transportation facilities and programs are adequate will be reviewed. Parameters should be realistic and meet the needs of the City of Renton. Transportation Mitigation Policy and detailed transportation mitigation payment system. Budgeting and funding process, including procedures for monitoring the Transportation Impro'/ement Program to demonstrate that .the City of Renton can achieve and maintain LOS standards. Deyelopment review procedures, including regulations and procedures for determining when concurrency by development is met. Rules, regulations and ordinances that implement the concurrency requirements. Transportation system monitoring, including procedures for the monitoring of transportation facilities to compare actual LOS to adopted standards. Monitoring of development to assess if probable funding will be available for transportation needs and to ensure that the Transportation Element is coordinated and consistent with the Land Use Element. 11-121 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 InterjlIrisdictional coordination. ReglIlations, facilities to be provided and development actions by regional and other local jlIrisdictions may change which cOlIld affect the City of Renton. The City will adjlIst transportation plans as needed to address changes. • Process to determine and implement adjlIstments to the CMS to reflect inplIt from monitoring land lIse, the transportation system and interjlIrisdictional actions. . 11-122 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 Environmental and Natural Resources Ex,paad Update discussion in this chapterContinue to review and revise, as needed, the to address objectives, policies and strategies to minimize or mitigate impacts of transportation plans on Renton's environment and natural resources .. , including Renton's adopted amended Sensitiye Areas Regulations (anticipated to be adopted by mid 2000). Review the latest air and water quality implementation plans from local and state agencies, and update this chapter 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 plans, as needed. 11-123 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 nmLIOGRA.PBY AIRPORT AlASTER PL4N UPDATE, CIty OF RENTON, 1978, 1988 AND 1997. AIR QUAUTYJ)ATA FOR KING, KITSAP, PIERCE, SNOHOAIISH COUNTIES, PSAPCA, , W9t. A POUCY ON GEOMETRICJ)ES!~N OFHI~HWAYSAND STREETS, AASIITO, 1994. CLEANAIR WASHl}\lGTONACT, CHAPTER 70.94, RC\V, 1991. crry CODE, CITY OF RENTON, 1989. I CITY COlJE lJEVELOPAIENTREGULATIfJNS, CITY OF RENTON, 1998 CITY OF RENTON, CENTRAL SUBAREA TRANSPORTATIONPLAI\~ REVISED DRA.FT, t994. CITY OF RENTOIV COAIAfUTE TRIP REDUCTUJIV ORlJI1VANCE ANlJ PLAN, 1993. CITY OF RENTON COAIPREHENSIVE PARKAND OPENSPACES PL4N, 1992. crry (hl?REIVTON COAIPREHENSIVE WALKPROGRAAfPRELIAIINARYENGINEERING REPORT, 1992. crry (hl?RENTONLAND USE ELEMENT OF THE COAIPREHENS!VE PL4N, 1994, AND 1997, 1998 MD;NDl\D;NTS. crry OF RENTON, LEVEL 0..'1' SERVICE J)OCUAIENTATU)N, 1994. CITY OF RENTON, REI\'TON TRANSIT PLAN SUPPORT DOCUAIENT, 1994. , crry OF RENTON SIX YEAR TRANSPORTATIONIAIPROVEAIENTPROGRAAf 2()(}(} 2(}(}5, ADOPTED JUNE 21, 1999. crry OF RENTON TRAILS MASTER PLA1V, 1990. crry OF REIVTON, TRANSPORTATIOIVAIlTI~ATION PEE SUPPORTJ)OCUAIENT, 1994. CITY OF RENTON TRUCK ROUTE ORlJINANCE, 1991. GUIDE FOR THE J)EVELOPAIENT OF BICYCLE FACIU:rIES, AASHTO, 1991. GROWTHAIANAGEAIENTACTPROCEDURAL CRITERIA, CHAPTER 365 195, "G\C, : 199O. IJ-124 CITY OF RENTON TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Revised 6/23/04 GROWTHAIANAGEAIENT, TRA.NSPORTATUJN WORK GROUP (NEWSLETTER) VOLUAIE 3, NOVE"MBER, 1992. KING COUNTYARTERIAL FUIVCTIOM4L CLASSIFIG4TJONAIAP, 1991. KIIVG COUNTY GROWTH AIANAGEAIENT PL4NNlIVG COUNCIL COUNTYWIDE PLANNING POLICIES, 1992. KING COUIVTYLEVEL OF SERVICE PRAMEWORKPOLICIES, 1993 KING COUIVTYROAD STANDARDS, 1987. KING COUNTY TRANSPORTATlONPL4N: ANNUAL NEEDS REPORT, 1993. LONG RAIVGE POUCYFRAAIEW~RK FOR PUBUC TRANSPORTATI{)N, l\{ETRO, 1993 AIANU4L ON UNIFORAf TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, 1988. REGlfJM4L TRANSIT PLAN, SOUND TRANSIT, 1997. RENTON COAIPREHENSIVE PLANLANlJ USE ELEMENT DRAFT ENVIROlVAlENTAL I.IIIPACTSTATEMENT, 1992. RE1VTON COAIPREHENSIVE PL4NL4ND USE ELEAIENT PINAL ENVIR01VMENTAL !AIPACT STA TEAIENT, 1993. TRANSIT OPERATIONS, METRO, 1993. VlSU)N 2{)2(), PUGETSOUND COUNCIL Ol? GOVERNMENTS, 1990. WASHINGTON STA TE COAIAfUTE TRIPRE])UCTI{)NACT, RC'" 70.94.521 551,1991. 11-125 • ,. CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 HOUSING ELEMENT Overview OEVElOPME ". CITY OF '1J:er~~NtNG AUG 2 62004 RECEIV~D Renton has a diverse housing stock with a wide range of unit types and prices. This includes new single family homes of all sizes, older single family homes and duplexes, townhouses, semi- attached houses, low and mid rise apartments and condominiums, and high-density mid-rise apartments in the Urban center. Renton also has a strong sense of community, and many established neighborhoods organized around schools, parks, and other institutions. In addition to established neighborhoods, where infill development has been increasingly common, the City has newly developed neighborhoods close to its southern and eastern edges, and emerging mixed use residential neighborhoods in several of its commercial centers. In 1998, Renton's downtown started to undergo a transformation, with a considerable amount of new housing development. Downtown Renton is becoming a vibrant urban neighborhood with many amenities. Areas along Lake Washington are also being redeveloped with mixed-use residential and commercial development, also at urban densities. Families, young singles, and couples are choosing to locate in Renton because of the community's amenities and the availability of new housing that suits their needs. Renton continues to have a supply of vacant, underutilized, and redevelopable land in its neighborhoods and mixed-use centers, offering many opportunities. for growth. The policies and map included in the Land Use Element of this Comprehensive Plan establish sufficient land capacity to accommodate forecasted population growth with new housing. The policies of the Housing Element further define how the City's housing stock and neighborhoods will grow and change. The Housing Element is based on an assessment of Renton's current demographics and existing housing stock. It also responds to the State's Growth Management Act (GMA), to the King County Countywide Planning Policies (CPP), to the City's Yision Statement, and to other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Along with the Residential sections of the Land Use Element, the Housing Element considers how Renton will accommodate its share of projected regional growth and how it will provide housing for all economic segments of its population. It provides a framework for addressing the housing needs of current and future residents. Finally, it serves as a guide for protecting and enhancing the quality oflife in residential and mixed-use areas. (See the Residential Sections of the Land Use Element for additional policies related to housing policies.) State and Regional Planning Context Housing is one of the 13 major goals .of the Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA). The GMA housing goal is to: "Encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of this state, promote a variety of residential densities, and housing types, and encourage preservation of existing housing stock. " By GMA mandate, the Housing Element must include: 1. An inventory and analysis of existing and projected housing needs. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & poJicies).doc -1- c - CITY OF RENTON HOUSIl'I~ ELEMENT 8-20-04 2. A statement of goals, policies, and objectives for the preservation, improvement and development of housing. ... .:J. An analysis that identifies sufficient land for housing, including, but not limited to government-assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multifamily housing, and group homes and foster care facilities. 4. An analysis which makes adequate provisions for existing and projected needs of all economic segments of the community. GMA directs that the "plan shall be an internally consistent document." The policies of one element cannot conflict with those of another element. The policy decisions made in each element may either be affected by or direct the other elements. The various elements address housing issues in the following ways. Land Use Element Housing Element Utilities Element Transportation Element Capital Facilities Element Directs where housing locates, the types of housing Refines densities, types of housing, provides a strategy for addressing the affordability of housing Influences the location of housing, costs, timing of development. Influences access to housing, jobs, services Influences services, quality of life, timing of development Amendments to the GMA in 1991 require cities and counties to jointly develop county widecountywide housing policies. King County's Countywide Planning Policies (CPP), developed by the Growth Management Planning Council, respond to this by identifying a housing unit growth target for each community in the County. The CPP also specify targets for housing units, for each community, that should be affordable to moderate and low-income households, and require jurisdictions to set housing unit growth targets for middle and upper income households. This Housing Element defines these targets and how they will be met. Public Review Process In 2002, the City convened a special task force to review its existing housing policies and the current housing situation, and to make recommendations for the 2002 update of the Housing Element. The task force included citizens, non-profit and for-profit housing developers, and members of the faith and human services community. The group met nine times during the first half of 2002. It first looked at background data about"Renton's housing, population, income, and zoning. Then it discussed issues including the variety of housing types, housing for moderate and low income residents, costs associated with housing development, and preservation of existing housing stock. The Housing Element Task Force Final Report is included in lAPp~~iX;li~:~.$ 0R~N;w.M~~~l of the Comprehensive Plan. The recommendations of the task force were incorporated into a preliminary draft of the Housing Element, which was then reviewed by the Renton Planning Commission. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Draft Plan and made its recommendation to the City Council in [P~tEj. ?fhe·:CltY:.'cqtih9)L11iJ~:,~;~~B~~~:of::WQrgsljgp~;~n~d;py~Ii'c.·iie~riPgs~~fq't~(q 'fin~l;'adc5 . tion;6ftn~·" Ian': . '.' .......... P ..... ' .. "... .J? '." ., H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25120042:24 PM -2- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Goals The Housing Element includes four broad goals, which provide general direction for the Element. Each goal is explained below, along with related information on Renton's population, housing stock, and housing growth capacity. Following the discussion is a list of Housing Element objectives and policies. The objectives provide a framework for guiding city actions and housing unit growth, and each objective responds to several goals. The policies that follow each objective further shape and guide city actions and development regulations. Renton's Housing Element goals are: 1. Ensure sufficient land capacity to accommodate the existing and future housing needs of the community, including Renton's share of forecasted regional growth. 2. Ensure that housing exists for all economic segments of Renton's population. 3. Ensure that there are housing opportunities for people with special needs, such as seniors, people with chronic disabilities, and the homeless. 4. Maintain, protect, and enhance the quality oflife of Renton's residents. Sufficient Capacity The 2000 Census showed 22,676 housing units in Renton, and it is estimated that in 2002 there are close to 24,000 units. Renton's mid-range housing unit growth target for the years 1992 through 2012 was 9,020. This figure was developed as part of the CPP and was based on forecasted population growth and household size. It includes a target of 60 units for the annexation area, transferred into the City's target as the area was annexed. From 1992 through 2000, there were 4,177 new housing units permitted in the City of Renton. This amounts to 46% of the middle target, achieved in first nine years of the 20-year target. The 2002 Comprehensive Plan update responds to a new target for housing unit growth through the year 2022. Renton's new target is 4,198. This replaces the remaining target from the 1992- 2012 planning period. The target is based on projected population growth, household size, and the amount of growth that occurred since the first round of comprehensive planning under GMA. GMA requires jurisdictions to show zoned land capacity for their targeted number of new housing units. This capacity includes land that is available for new development, redevelopment, or infill development. During the previous planning period, jurisdictions were required to show 25% excess capacity, due to uncertainty about the actual density of new development. However, due to methodology developed since then, this excess capacity requirement had been eliminated. Renton's 1995 Comprehensive Plan established policies about minimum density requirements for the City's residential zones. Minimum densities ensure that actual residential development approaches the capacity projections, meets Urban Center criteria, minimizes inefficient use of urban services and infrastructure, and supports transit service in urbanized areas. The annual Buildable Lands reports, part of a countywide effort to track the actual density of growth and future growth capacity, showed that Renton's achieved density is compatible with its growth target. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -3- ---------------------------- \. CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 The diagram Figure 1 below shows the zoned capacity for housing units by land use category within the city, according to the Land Use Map. The total housing unit capacity is 9,742. The capacity of the unincorporated portions of Renton's planning area is 5,622. '2~:.!:.~H::;::~. Including the unincorporated planning area for Renton, the total capacity is [~1'.4~!:~ over 15.000 new housing units. This City has sufficient capacity to house targeted growth through 2022. Figure 1 ,.,. _. CD c: 2:-.;::-.;::-I!! c: <ii ~~ 'E 'E 'E .g! ~ 'e <ii '" .l!! ~ c: .9 Q) 'C: :J c: LL Q) c: g~ o Q) ~:E U ~ (/) III Q) en ~ .~ 'S 0 Q) c: 0> ,S ~::2: ::2: 0 8 ex: 0 c: (/).;::-u i:i5 'E '" LL Source: Washington State Office of Financial M(lnagement Etistin-g--lffiu-s-iu~,MixMix of Unit Tvpes In 2000, Renton had an approximately equal amount of housing units in single-family houses as in multi-family buildings. This did not represent a. significant change in the proportion when compared to 1990. Figure ~;T'::~ 2 shows Renton's housing stock by structure type. The largest growth since 1990 was in buildings of five or more units (1,889 new units), followed by single-family structures (1,235 new units). Sixty-four new duplex units were added, and 226 new units in structures containing three or four units. Since the first Countywide housing unit growth targets were established in 1992,60% of Renton's new housing units have been in multifamily structures. Figure 2 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -4- • CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Housing Units by Structure Type, 2000 5 or more unit structure 42% o Source: 2000 US. Census Hou.'1ing l\1iX at Build Out Single family detached 49% The approximately 10,000 units that would be built if all vacant land and land with redevelopment potential within the City were to be developed at its currently zoned capacity would bring the total number of housing units to about 33,500. Of the total, about 14,000 units or about 42 percent would be in single family structures and about 19,000 units or about 58 percent would be in multi-family buildings. Approximately 3,500 of the new multifamily units would be in the downtown area. The eventual mix of single family and multi-family units depends upon many factors including demand, development costs, and specific development regulations, especially in areas where regulations allow a mix of unit types. The City-wide balance can also be adjusted through annexation of unincorporated areas, which are predominately single family and have additional zoned capacity for single-family houses. At build out, unincorporated areas would have almost ~~?i@[~1tJ, total housing units. Single ,.....".l~""l"'~.; .. w"'~';'n.tl'f!~ .u;:;;:: family units would comprise almost :~~tf~% of these units. The Renton planning area, containing both incorporated and unincorporated areas, currently has the planned capacity to accommodate almost .' , housing units. At build out, the housing mix of the Renton W:": (r-n"'l"·\'~n"';"""~~ ....... planning area would be . ~single family and '~~Ju.J multi-family. Household Trends Demographic trends provide an indication of future demand for various unit types. According the 2000 U.S. Census, average household size in Renton is 2.29 persons. Average household size for owner-occupied housing units in 2000 was 2.47. For renters it was 2.11. This shows an increase in renter-occupied household size, up from 2.03 in 1990, and a decrease in owner occupied household size, which was 2.53 in 1990. Renton's household size is much smaller than several of its neighboring South King County cities and smaller than nearby Bellevue. In Renton, 34% of all households are persons living alone. This represents the most common household type, and the majority of them, 62%, are renters. 33% of Renton's households are two- person households, with the majority of these, 66%, being homeowners. Offamily households, which also includes single parents, 60% are homeowners, while only 36% of non-family households are owners (this includes persons living alone). Figure ~3 shows the composition of Renton's households. . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/2512004 2:24 PM -5- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Figure 3 Household Composition in Renton, 2000 Other Source: 2000 U.S. Census Married couple no children 23% 9% Married couple with children 18% Housing /Zerlor All Economic Segments GMA requires all jurisdictions to encourage the availability of housing for all economic segments of the population. These economic segmentsare defined by the State of Washington and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) as follows: Upper Income Middle Income Moderate Income Low Income Very Low Income Households at 121 % of Median Income and above. Households at 80-120% of Median Income Households at 50-80% of Median Income Households at 30-50% of Median Income: Households below 30% of Median Income HUD also defines the maximum amount which households should have to pay for housing as 30% of total household income. The CPP consider households that earn less than 80% of county median income but pay more than 30% of their income for housing costs to be in need of less expensive housing. The CPP ask all cities to take action to address existing housing needs, and to create affordable housing for expected population growth. Housing costs are related to development costs, but are also a function of supply and demand, interest rates, and policies at many levels of government. As the vast majority of housing is supplied by the private sector, local governments use regulatory means to influence the supply, unit types, and affordability of new housing. Local regulations with an impact on the cost of housing include subdivision and road requirements, utility policies, mitigation fees, building and energy code requirements, and zoning regulations. In addition, overall permit processing time and fees also affect new home prices. Affordability of Housing in Renton Housing prices have risen rapidly in Renton and in most parts of King County over the past 25 years. From April 2001 to April 2002 alone, the Northwest Multiple Listing Service showed a 27% increase in Renton's median home sale price. Over the past decade, home prices have outpaced growth in income, although low interest rates starting in the late 1990s and continuing through the time of this update have made high prices somewhat more affordable. Rents also H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -6-' , CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 increased substantially during the 1990s but leveled off in the early 2000s. While other parts of the economy slowed in 2001 and 2002, home prices remained high. Renton median sale prices and rents are somewhat lower than for King County, and the 2001 King County Benchmarks Report showed that a greater percentage of Renton's market~rate housing is affordable to moderate and low income households than is affordable in King County as a whole. Figure ~~4 shows the percentage of market-rate housing units that were affordable to three broad income categories based on prices and county median income in 2000. Figure 4 Percent of Housing Stock Affordability at Household Income Categories, 2000 Above 80% AMI 42% 50% AMI and below 27% 51 to 80% AMI 31% Source: 2001 King County Benchmark Report Based on 2000 HUD Income Levels for King County and market-rate rental and ownership units Figure =4.does not account for 1,424 units of subsidized, public, and non-profit housing in Renton. An inventory done by the City in 2002 showed that approximately 910 of these units (4% of Renton's total housing units) are geared at households at or below 50% AMI, although the varying types of income restrictions used in subsidized housing means the count is only an estimate. The chart also does not account for households living in Renton with Section 8 rental assistance vouchers. In January of2002, over 500 Renton households (2% of all Renton households) received Section 8 rental assistance. Section 8 vouchers are for households earning at or below 50% AMI. The chart does not indicate the availability of market-rate affordable housing, its condition, or its size or adequacy for the households that need or occupy it. The chart also does not show separately the amount of market-rate housing affordable to very low income households, those earning 30% AMI or below, since it is combined with the 30-50% AMI category. The City's inventory of subsidized housing shows at least 260 units, or 1.2% of all housing units, that are geared at this category. In addition, 75% of Section 8 vouchers are for households in this category. Overpayment for housing is perhaps the best indication of need, although Census 2000 data showing overpayment correlated to income were not available at the time of this writing. The percent of renter households in Renton that are overpaying jumped by 4.6 percentage points from 25.6 in 1989 to 30.2 in 2000. The percent of owner-occupants who are overpaying nearly doubled, from 9.6 in 1989 to 18.0 in 2000, however it is likely that many overpaying owner- occupant households are in higher income categories than overpaying renters. (These figures include households paying more than 35% of income on housing costs.) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Upc.late\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8125/20042:24 PM -7- E • CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Underpaying households comprise a much larger portion of all Renton households, indicating that many have significant disposable income. 48.7 percent of renters were underpaying in 2000 (spending less than 25 percent of income on housing costs), and 62.4 percent of owner-occupants. Figure ii(~5 shows an estimate of Renton's households by HUD income categories. When compared with the percent of housing affordable to the income categories in 2000, this data indicates that Renton has a shortage of housing for middle and upper income households, a small surplus of housing for low income households and a large surplus of housing for moderate income households. However, it was not possible to determine whether the affordable housing shown in Figure ~:(':~4 was actually occupied by lower income households. Figure 5 Estimate of Renton population by HUD income categories, 2001 Low and very low income 50% of median and below ~oderateincome 51 to 80% of median ~iddle income 81 to 120% of median Upper income Over 120% of median Total Source: Calculations based on data from Clantas This data does not account for household size. Upper Income Housing Percent 23% 14% 27% 36% 100% Approximate number of households 5,096 3,074 5,914 7,869 22000 The 1995 Comprehensive Plan set a goal of 30% of new housing units per year to be affordable at this income level. Of ownership housing, approximately 41 % of new homes sold in 2001 were affordable only to upper income households (or some middle income households with a down payment of more than 5%). All of these were detached single family homes. The prices of new construction rental homes were not tracked. Of existing home sales, about 19% were affordable only to upper income households. While a few of the new upper-income homes are in areas with one or fewer units per acre, the majority are in the R-5 (5 units per acre) zone. In addition, there are a number of new market-rate apartment complexes on Lake Washington and in the downtown, with some units geared at upper-income households. As the region becomes more densely populated and the convenience and amenities of urban neighborhoods become increasingly desirable, upper income households will be found in a greater variety of neighborhoods and housing types. Apartment, townhouse, and condominium units with amenities such as views and waterfront access account for a growing share of high-end housing. Middle Income Housing This income segment has many choices for housing in Renton, and much of the new stock of ownership housing in 2001 is affordable to this group. However, estimates of income and housing suggest that an increase in housing for this segment would be readily absorbed. New single- family homes in new neighborhoods and on infill sites will provide housing for this income H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25120042:24 PM -8- ; CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 segment, while innovative housing types such as small lot detached houses and semi-attached houses may also be a part of the growth in housing at this income level. Moderate Income Housing Analysis of data from 1997 through 2001 suggests that Renton exceeded its target of 17% of new units annually affordable to this income segment with ownership housing alone. In addition, a large amount of rental housing in Renton is also affordable at this level, with average market-rate rents being affordable to households at 80% AMI and slightly older buildings being affordable below that level of income. In 2002, rising apartment vacancies mean more availability of rental stock affordable to this category. Low interest rates have also helped moderate income households, mostly those at the high end of this category, to purchase a home, however there is no way to judge what vacancy and interest rates will be in the long term. The City values opportunities for home ownership at the moderate income level, particularly the opportunity to buy a first home. Where households can located in neighborhoods with convenient access to transit, some may choose to lower their rate of car ownership, saving money and allowing them to pay (or borrow) more for housing. Low and Very Low Income Housing While the majority of new housing is affordable to middle and high income households, the majority of housing for low and very low income households has historically been older stock, although some new stock is geared at these income segments. Some of the community's housing needs that cannot be met on the market are met by public housing authorities, such as the Renton Housing Authority (RHA), and by private non-profit housing providers. The RHA is one of only four public housing authorities in King County. Since current conditions make construction of housing affordable to low and very low income households difficult without a subsidy, RHA and non-profits playa necessary role in providing and managing a portion of Renton's housing stock. These organizations are generally subject to the same land use regulations as for-profit developers, however they can access an array of federal, local, and charitable funding to make their products affordable to households in the lower income segments. In recent years, financial tools have been created at the federal and state level to enable private for-profit developers to provide subsidized housing for low income households. These tools, such as tax credits, may play an increasing role in the provision of housing for low and moderate income levels. Some household needs are also met through payment assistance programs which have traditionally eebeen available only for renters but are now sometimes available for homeowners. While approximately 6 percent of new stock created in the last planning period was affordable to this income group, the number of households in this income group in Renton served by Housing Choice vouchers has been increasing over the past few years. The combination of a Housing Choice Voucher and Renton's existing affordable stock has Renton to provide housing for low- income families and seniors. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25120042:24 PM -9- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Overcrowding Overcrowding is an indicator of housing need. It is created by high housing costs, which force people to over occupy housing units or "double up" in order to reduce housing expenditures, or by a shortage of available housing units. Moderate overcrowding is defined as households with between 1.01 and 1.50 persons per room. Extreme overcrowding is defined as households with over 1.51 persons per room. Figure t.()...~shciws that overcrowding rates in Renton have increased since 1990, indicating that there may be more need than income and housing price data show. Figure lO§. Overcrowded Households in Renton, 1990 and 2000 1990 2000 Number Percent of Number Percent of (18,642 total Total (21,689 total Total households) Households households) Households Moderate Overcrowding 424 2.3% 750 3.5% Severe Overcrowding 261 1.4% 701 3.2% Source: J 990 and 2000 u.s. Census However, the rental vacancy rate was very low (4.7%) at the time of the 2000 census and it is possible that overcrowding has eased somewhat since vacancy rates at this time ofthis writing are higher (8.8% in spring 2000, according to Dupre+Scott). Overcrowding can also be eased by increasing the supply of affordable housing, and providing higher wage employment opportunities for residents. Special Housing T:vpesHousing (or 5'pecial Populations Elderly residents often need specialized housing combined with services and many elderly find their incomes declining as they grow older, making affordable housing more important. Census 2000 sample data shows an estimated 401 persons age 65 and over were below the federally defined poverty level in 1999. This is about 0.8% of the Renton's population, or about 7.8% of the population of age 65 and over. The' poverty rate among the elderly was lower than the rate among the general population, which was 9.7%. 46% of the population age 65 and over (2,215 individuals) have a disability, according to Census 2000, although the degree of disability was not indicated. Mean Social Security Income for households in Renton in 1999 was $12,100. Mean retirement income for households in Renton in 1999 was $18,330. A 2001 inventory of subsidized, public, and non-profit housing, done by the City, showed 297 uni ts of dedicated senior housing, 215 units for either seniors or the disabled, and 209 units for either seniors or families. In addition, there were 16 housing units dedicated to the developmentally disabled, and three ,units exclusively for mentally ill residents. This does not include the many market-rate housi~'g units that may also be occupied by special population residents. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA'Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/20042:24 PM -10- • ; CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Homelessness Homelessness is a regional issue, as homeless households are mobile and tend to go where emergency and transitional housing exist. Emergency shelters provide housing for a few nights to a few months, while transitional housing is typically for a few months to one or two years. While Renton has limited capacity for sheltering the homeless, south King County has more than its fair share. The southern portion of the county has 51 % of the emergency housing units in the county outside of Seattle, and 61 % of the transitional housing units in the county outside of Seattle. Renton has transitional housing for 21 families, about 8% of south King County transitional housing units. Homelessness is difficult to measure, and homeless rates are difficult to predict. The proportion of homeless people with limited English-speaking ability, measured during a one-night count of homeless population in emergency and transitional housing in King County outside of Seattle was 14%. This is significantly higher than that of King County's general population, which is 8.4% according to Census 2000. (The rate oflimited English speaking ability among individuals in Renton's population is 12%.) The majority of homeless people in shelters are part of families, though this may reflect the fact that many shelters are designed to serve families. 34% of homeless households in the one-night count (in King County excluding Seattle) included an employed person, indicating that low wage jobs may be a significant factor in homelessness. The disability rate in the same count was 21 %, a measure which includes alcohol and substance abuse (39% of disabilities) along with physical and mental disabilities. (Source: United Way) Quality of Life Quality of Neighborhoods and Neighborhood Enhancement Neighborhood Enhancementprogram In 1997, the City started its Neighborhoods Program to enhance the quality of community life, strengthen neighborhood identity, increase neighborhood involvement in government, and encourage the preservation of neighborhood character when neighborhoods are impacted by new development. Infill development in existing neighborhoods is part of the strategy for meeting housing unit growth targets, and the City's policies aim to address neighborhood concerns as neighborhoods are always impacted in some way by new development. Mixed Use Centers Mixed use centers include a significant amount of Renton's housing unit growth capacity. These centers comprise many of Renton's existing commercial areas. Renton is guiding redevelopment in these areas to be pedestrian-oriented and to incorporate housing for a variety of income levels, as well as commercial and office uses. The centers will provide a high quality of life with proximity to shopping, transit, and parks,and a variety of public facilities. Downtown Renton is a regional Urban Center, with a mix of residential, commercial, and public uses. In 1990, downtown had a significant concentration oflow-income housing, and a lack of market-rate housing. As of2002, this trend has been reversed. Three new developments in the past few years, with retail on the ground floor and several floors of market-rate housing above, started the much anticipated transformation of the downtown into a pedestrian-friendly urban residential neighborhood. Downtown Renton also has a new transit center and urban park, and will soon have a new performing arts center, making living there both convenient and enjoyable. AdditoinalAdditional market-rate downtown housing is anticipated. H:\EDNSP\CompPlan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\!1D-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -11- CITY OF RENTON HOUSu'IG ELEMENT 8-20-04 Homeownership The City considers homeownership desirable at all income levels, as it produces stable neighborhoods and gives citizens a long term stake in the community. Though increases in housing price made it increasingly difficult for first time buyers to enter the housing market during much of the 1990s, low interest rates in the past few years have eased this situation. The percentage of owner occupied housing units in Renton increased from 45.9% in 1990 to 47.8% in 2000. In order to encourage continued growth in homeownership at all income levels, Renton is encouraging the construction of a variety of housing types. Programs to help first-time homebuyers, sometimes simply through education, can also contribute to increased home ownership. In addition, the City of Renton adopted a condominium conversion ordinance in 1979. Very few condominium conversions have occurred since that time. Age of Residential Structures Housing built 1990 accounts for over 21% of Renton's housing stock, with much of it being built since 1995. However, Renton also has a significant proportion of older housing stock. 24% of the stock was constructed from in 1959 or before. Some older houses are located in parts of the City now designated for mixed use or commercial development. Figure +l-1 describes the age of residential structures in the City at the time of the 2000 Census. Figure 1.J-l. Age of Residential Structures 2000 Year Structure Built 1999 to March 2000 758 3.3% 1995 to 1998 2,193 9.7% 1990 to 1994 1,886 8.3% 1980 to 1989 4,875 21.5% 1970 to 1979 3,679 16.2% 1960 to 1969 3,878. 17.1% 1940 to 1959 3,982 17.5% 1939 or earlier 1,448 6.4% Total 22,699 100.0% Source: 2000 U.S. Celt.'ws Condition of Housing There is not current data available on housing condition in Renton. However, the City also is active in funding two programs through the Community Development Block Grants designed to prevent deterioration of housing in Renton. The City also inspects for building code violations both actively and based on complaints. Demolitions Since 1990 about 12 housing units were demolished per year in the City. Many demolitions were of structures adjacent to expanding commercial areas. Other demolitions were the result of new subdivisions and multifamily housing developments. In some cases new single family homes were rebuilt on the site of a recently demolished single family home. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 'PM -12- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Most residential demolitions are done by private action. Rarely has the City in the course building code enforcement had to remove a residential structure to ensure public safety. However. the City has, and likely will in the future, acquire and demolish residential structures in the course of making infrastructure improvements or other municipal activities. One recent City action concerned construction of a water utility pump station that required the demolition of a single family home. Manufactured Housing Manufactured or modular housing is permanent housing that is placed on a foundation. When new manufactured housing is placed in single family zones, it conforms to all applicable development standards. With recent advances in design, construction, and shipping, new manufactured homes can be virtually indistinguishable from site-built homes in both appearance and quality, while offering real cost savings. For example, two-story manufactured homes designed to blend with existing homes have recently been placed in a Seattle neighborhood. While no two-story manufactured homes currently exist in Renton, the number of newer manufactured homes on scattered sites in Renton has not been counted. The City and its potential annexation area also include several mobile/manufactured home parks built over the past 50 years. As of June 2002, the City of Renton has one mobile home park and two manufactured housing developments. The three properties include 487 dwelling units. Early mobile home parks were designed for manufactured homes and in some cases accommodated long term occupancy of travel and camping trailers. Some newer manufactured housing developments were master planned and conformed to the development standards of a zoning district designed to accommodate them. There is also a small but undetermined amount of older mobile/manufactured housing units scattered on individual lots throughout the City. As property values in the Puget Sound region continue to increase, the conversion of mobile home parks to other land uses continues to be an issue. While mobile homes can provide affordable ownership housing, they do not contribute to a household's assets through appreciation in the way that owning permanent housing can. Tracking Progress toward Goals Monitoring, which is required by the Countywide Planning Policies, enables jurisdictions to evaluate the effectiveness of their housing policies and development regulations. To date, cities have successfully provided data to King County for tracking the actual density of new housing development. This is useful in evaluating the progress of cities toward forecasted housing unit growth, without consideration of affordability. More limited efforts have been made in tracking the affordability of new housing units, and cities' progress toward their targets for each income segment. A clear definition of the types of H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8125/2004 2:24 PM -13- ---------------------------------------------- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 housing that count toward each targets makes monitoring possible. However, affordability is a moving target since it is based on income, interest rates, and other volatile factors. In addition, data on the sales prices of homes tends to be more complete than rental data, though the varying level of savings and financial terms with whic~ households purchase their homes makes true affordability difficult to measure. The monitoring of affordability can only be based on the best data available. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -14- ,. CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 HOUSING ELEMENT GOALS 1. Provide an adequate amount of housing to meet the existing and future needs. 2. Improve housing afJordability at all income levels. 3. Provide additional housing opportunities in Renton by encouraging special housing types protected by State regulations including accessory units, manufactured housing, group homes and other special needs housing. 4. Maintain protect and enhance the quality of life in the City's neighborhoods. POLICIES -SINGLE-FAMILYIMULTl-F AMILY BALANCE OF UNIT TYPES Objective H-A: Maintain a balance in the number of single-family and multi-family housing units outside of the urban center, through adequate zoned capacity. Policy H-I. Count new unit types as follows when monitoring the single-family-multi-family balance: 1. Count cottages as single-family houses. 2. Count semi-attached houses as single-family houses. 3. Count accessory dwelling units as multi-family units, while continuing to count the primary unit in a house with an ADU as a single-family unit. Policy D-2. Ensure that sufficient multi-family capacity is provided within the city boundaries in order to accommodate housing demand, provide adequate housing options, meet urban center criteria under the State Growth Management Act and Countywide Planning Policies, and prevent unnecessary increases in housing costs. POLICIES -COST OF REGULATION, PERMITTING TIME, AND FEES Objective H-B: Ensure that City fees and permitting time are set at reasonable levels so they do not adversely afJect the cost of housing. Policy H-3. Ensure predictable and efficient permit processing. Policy H-4. Create and maintain utility standards that encourage infill development. Policy H-S. Create and maintain development standards that reduce the overall cost of housing as long ashealth'and safety can be maintained. POLICIES -UPPER INCOME HOUSING Objective H-C: Increase housing opportunities for upper income households. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & poJicies),docLast printed 812512004 2:24 PM -15- CITY OF RENTON HOUS. ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy H-6. Achieve the target of 30 percent of new housing units annually through 2022 to be affordable to upper income households that earn over 120 percent of county median income, as established by the City in response to the Countywide Planning Policies. Policy H-7. Provide opportunities for large and medium-lot single-family development. Policy H-8. Utilize low-density single-family Areas and Resource Conservation designations to provide opportunities for upper income development. Policy H-9. Encourage larger lots on parcels with physical amenity features ofthe land such as views, significant vegetation or steep slopes. Policy H-IO. Encourage construction of upper income homes on larger existing parcels which are exempted from minimum density requirements as set forth in Policy LU-X. Policy H-ll. Encourage the construction ofluxury condominium developments in mixed use areas. Policy H-12. Support site plans and subdivisions incorporating amenity features such as private recreation facilities, e.g. pools, tennis courts and private parks to serve luxury developments. Policy H-13. Increase public awareness of upper income housing opportunities in Renton. POLICIES -MODERATE AND MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING Objective H-D: Encourage the private sector to provide market rate housingfor the widest potential range of income groups including middle and moderate income households. Policy H-14. Achieve the Countywide Planning Policies target that 17 percent of new housing units annually through 2022 should be affordable to moderate income households that earn 51 to 80 percent of county median income. Policy H-15. Achieve the target of33 percent of new housing units annually through 2022 to be affordable to middle income households that earn 81 to 120 percent of county median income, as established by the City in response to the Countywide Planning Policies. Policy H-16. Encourage home ownership opportunities affordable to moderate income households. Policy H-17. Encourage the construction of townshouse, condominium, and rental units affordable to moderate income households in mixed-use developments as defined in the Land Use Element. Policy H-18. Continue to provide technical assistance for redevelopment ofland particularly in downtown Renton. Policy H-19. Market Renton to housing developers. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM ~16- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy H-20. Continue to maintain an updated inventory ofland available for housing development. Policy H-21. Support proposals for moderate-income housing based on the following criteria: 1. Dispersion of moderate-income housing throughout the City. 2. Convenient access to transit for moderate-income households 3. A range of unit types including family housing. 4. Ownership housing when possible S. Long-term affordability. Policy H-22. Pursue public-private partnerships to provide and manage moderate-income housing. Policy H-23. Provide zoning standards that allow studios and other small rental units, which would be affordable to moderate income households. . Policy H-24. Disperse moderate-income housing in all areas of the City that has vacant land. Policy H-25. Ensure that a sufficient amount ofland in all multi-family and mixed-use areas of the City is zoned to allow attached housing and innovative housing types. POLICIES -LOW INCOME HOUSING Objective H-E: Increase housing opportunities for low and very low-income Renton residents and provide a fair share of low-income housing in the future. Policy H-26. Achieve the Countywide Planning Policies target for Renton, defined by the City as: a number of housing units equal to 20 percent of newly permitted housing units annually through 2022 to be affordable to low income households that earn SO percent of county median income or less. Policy H-27. Establish the following sub-targets for affordability to households earning SO percent of county median income or less, to be counted toward the 20 percent target: 1. 10 percent of new housing units constructed in the City. 2. A number equal to S percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are given long-term affordability. 3. A number equal to S percent of new housing units, to be met by existing units that are purchased by low-income households through home-buyer assistance programs. Policy H-28. Support proposals for affordable housing, created with public subsidies, that give priority to households earning at or below 80 percent of regional median income. Policy H-29. Support proposals for low-income housing for households earning less than 60% of area median income based on the following criteria: 1. Dispersion of low-income housing throughout the City. 2. Convenient access to transit for low-income households. 3. A range of unit types including family housing. 4. Ownership housing when possible. S. Long-term affordability. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Arriendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM . -17- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Policy H-30. Pursue pUblic-private partnerships to provide and manage affordable housing. Strategy H-30.1. Support non-profi~ agencies that construct and manage projects within the City. Strategy H-30.2. Support the role of the Renton Housing Authority in providing additional housing. Strategy h-30.3. Before City surplus property is sold, evaluate its suitability for development of affordable housing. , Strategy H-30A. Use a greater percentage of federal funds including Community Development block Grants and HOME funds to support low and moderate income affordable housing. ' Policy H-31. Work with other King County cities to address regional housing issues. Policy H-32. Disperse low-income housing in all mixed-use and multi-family land use designations that allow attached dwelling units. Policy H-33. Encourage preservation, maint~nance, and improvements to existing subsidized housing and to market-rate housing that is affordable to low and moderate income households. Policy H-34. Reduce existing housing need, defined as the number of existing households that earn 80 percent of county median income or less, and are paying more than 30 percent of their income for housing or live in inadequate housing by increasing housing supply for all economic segments of the community and creating opportunities for higher income households to vacate existing lower cost units, but stay in Renton. Strategy H -34.1. Prioritize applications to the City for housing rehabilitation grants to homeowners earning 80 percent of county median income or below based on the greatest degree of existing need. With the exception of emergencies, priority should be given to households occupying conventional housing. POLICIES -SPECIAL POPULATIONS Objective H-F: Increase the supply of special needs housing. Policy H-35. Support the housing programs of social service organizations, including the Renton Housing Authority, that provide opportunities for special needs populations. Policy H-36. Support the establishment and operation of emergency shelters. Policy H-37. Support proposals for special needs housing that: 1. Offer a high level of access to shopping, services, and other facilities needed by the residents. 2. Demonstrates that it meet the transportation needs of residents. 3. Help to preserve low-income and spe~ial needs housing opportunities in a neighborhood where those opportunities are being lo,st. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/20042:24 PM -18- , CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 4. Disperse special needs housing throughout the residential areas of the City. Policy H-3S. Support development proposals by sponsors of assisted housing when applicants document efforts to establish and maintain positive relationships with neighbors. Policy H-39. Retain the City of Renton Fair Housing Ordinance to reflect the following principles from the Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act of 1988: 1. Insure that no dwelling is made unavailable or denied to any member of a protected class. 2. Make reasonable accommodations in its rules, policies, practices, and services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities equal opportunity to use or enjoy a dwelling. 3. Prohibit the application of special requirements through land use regulations, restrictive covenants, and conditional or special use permits that have the effect of limiting the ability of persons from protected classes to live in the residence of their choice in the community. POLICIES -VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES AND REGULATORY MEASURES FOR AFFORDABILITY Objective H-G. Allow the construction of a variety of housing types affordable to low, moderate, and middle-income households when site plans and subdivisions address maintaining the quality of ne;ighborhoods. Policy H-40. Support projects including subdivisions and site plans incorporating innovative lot and housing types, clustered detached houses, clustered semi-attached houses, and varied lot and housing types within a site. Policy H-41. Support projects that incorporate quality features, such as additional window details, consistent architectural features on all facades, above average roofing and siding, entry porches or trellises where innovative site or subdivision designs are permitted Policy H-42. Encourage the construction of cottages on small lots through incentives such as density bonuses. Policy H-43. Support standards that allow cottage housing developments with the following features in residential zones, provided the cottages are limited by size or bulk: 1. Allow increased density over the zoned density. 2. Allow reduced minimum lot size, lot dimensions, and setbacks. 3. Allow both clustered and non-clustered cottages. 4. Allowing clustered parking. 5. Base the required number of parking spaces on unit size. Policy H-44. Support accessory dwelling units as strategies for providing a variety of housing types arid as a strategy for providing affordable housing, with the following criteria: 1. Ensure owner occupancy of either the primary or secondary unit. 2. Allow both attached and detached accessory dwelling units and detached carriage units, at a maximum of one per single-family house, exempt from the maximum density requirement of the applicable zone. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/20042:24 PM -19- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 3. Require an additional parking space for each accessory dwelling unit, with the ability to waive this requirement for extenuating circumstances. 4. Allow a variety of entry locations and treatments while ensuring compatibility with existing neighborhoods POLICIES -MANUFACTURED HOUSING ZONE Objective H-H: Continue to allow manufacfured home parks and manufactured home subdivisions on land that is specifically zoned for these uses .. Policy H-45. Maintain existing manufactured housing developments that meet the following criteria: I 1. The development provides market rate housing alternatives for moderate and low income households. 2. The housing is maintained and certified as built to the International Building Code and Federal Department of Housing and 'Urban Development. 3. Site planning includes pedestrian amenities, landscaping, and a community facility. POLICIES -MANUFACTURED, MODU~AR, AND FACTORY BUILT HOMES Objective H-I: Allow the use of quality modularor factory-built homes on permanent foundations. Policy H-46. Allow and encourage the use of "gold seal" modular homes built to the standards of the Uniform Building Code, and "red seal" manufactured homes built to the standards of the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development in any zone allowing residential uses, as long as the housing meets all applicable city codes, looks similar to site-built housing, and is placed on a permanent foundation. POLICIES -PRESERVATION OF EXISTING HOUSING Objective H-J: Preserve and protect the existing housing stock. Policy H-47. Preserve existing housing stock where residential uses conform to zoning requirements. Policy H-48. Encourage replacement of demolished housing units within redevelopment projects. Policy H-49. Target code enforcement to correct health and safety violations. Policy H-50. Identify areas in the City for priority funding for rehabilitation by non-profit housing sponsors. Policy H-51. Continue City funding of housing rehabilitation and repair. Policy H-S2. Encourage creative re-use of ex;isting buildings for housing within the City, where housing can be included at zoned capacity. POLICIES -QUALITY OF NEIGHORHOODS H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM - , -20- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Objective H-K: Develop and maintain livable neighborhoods with a desirable quality o/life. Policy B-53. Promote high quality residential living environments in all types of neighborhoods. Policy B-54. Promote community identity, pride, and involvement in neighborhoods. Strategy H -54.1. Continue to support the City's neighborhood program to encourage neighborhood involvement, address local conditions, and provide neighborhood enhancements sueh as neighborhood entry signs and landseaping. Policy B-55. Protect the character of existing single-family neighborhoods by promoting high quality development. Strategy H -55.1. Use design standards to encourage housing types that protect privacy, provide landscaping or other buffering features between structures of different scale, and lor promote investments that increase property values where housing that is more dense is allowed in existing single-family neighborhoods. Strategy H-55.2. Development standards for duplex and triplex developments should encourage design at the scale of single-family developments by limiting building length and height. Policy B-56. Relate the size of structures to the size oflots in order to create development that fits into a neighborhood. Policy B-57. New single-family subdivisions should provide pedestrian and vehicular connections to adjoining residential development unless a determination is made that a physical feature of the site, such as a ravine, wetland or pre-existing developed property prevents practical implementation of this provision. POLICIES -HOME OWNERSHIP Objective B-L: Increase the percentage of homeowners hip in the City. Policy B-58. Allow zero lot line developments and duplex units with common wall construction on separately platted lots in designations that permit attached unit types. Strategy H-59.1. Encourage condominium and fee simple townhouse developments with ground access and small yards. Strategy H-59.2. Encourage the development of small detached houses on platted lots, or condominium developments where lot areas with yards are established without platting. Policy B-59. Support first time home buyer programs such as those available through the Washington State Housing Finance Commission and other similar private or not-for-profit programs with similar or better program elements and rates. POLICIES -HOUSING IN MIXED-USE AREAS H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies).docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -21- CITY OF RENTON HOUSING ELEMENT 8-20-04 Objective H-M: Develop location designated residential living environments in locations designated for mixed use, as defined in the Umd Use Element. Policy H-60. Encourage a range of housing types in Centers and Commercial designations allowing mixed-use. Policy H-61. Through non-conforming use policies in Section _, Land Use, maintain existing housing units in the Centers until property is. redeveloped as part of a higher density residential or mixed use project. Policy H-62. Encourage housing in the downtown that provides opportunities for all economic segments of the population. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ELEMENTS\HD-Housing (narrative & policies}.docLast printed 8/25/2004 2:24 PM -22- 8-20-04 City of Renton Human Services Element . . O€VgtOPMENr NOTE: The Human Services Element is new to our Comprehensive Plan~ Of: fiE~~NNtNG ~A N UG 2 6 2lJOi, HUMAN SERVICES ELEMENT RECEIVED. 1. GOAL: To create a community in which all members have the opportunity to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs, for the enhancement of their quality of life. -1 - D . :.-. ... c • 8-20-04 City of Renton Human Services Element Objective HS-A: Enable individuals to meet their basic physical, economic, and social needs by promoting an effective human services delivery system and enhancing their quality of life. , Policy HS-l: To identify opportunities and develop strategies that are proactive and preventative in their approach to human services needs. Human Services are services and strategies that: >-Support vulnerable or at risk individuals and families in times of need' >-Address the social conditions that make people vulnerable or put them at risk >-Foster an effective and efficient system of services. Human Services that meet basic human needs and promote safe and healthy communities can be represented on a continuum, from prevention of crises, including crime, to assuring basic survival to assistance in becoming self- reliant. This continuum includes the following spectrum ofservices: • Prevention and Early Intervention - Those services and strategies that . reduce or prevent adverse human behaviors and social conditions that lead to crises, serious dysfunction or disability. An example of a preventative service is counseling- counseling may help avoid or reduce the severity of depression. Prevention by its nature means that absolutely nothing happens, its success registered only in later comparisons. Early interventions present the problems of all investments in growth -the dividends come later. There is a long time lapse between intervention and payoff, which makes prompt demonstration of effectiveness impossible. .• Criminal Justice Linked Services - Those services that assist individuals and their families avoid involvement with the system. After school programs for youth are an example. • Crisis Intervention Services -Those services that address life threatening situations and other crises. Provision offood and shelter falls in this category. • Rehabilitation and Support -Those services and strategies that provide treatment for individual and family problems or provide support to maintain or enhance their present level of independence. Drug and alcohol treatment is an example of rehabilitation. Policy HS-2: Allocate City general funds for services that address the full spectrum of community needs . Policy HS-3: Assess and anticipate local human services needs, provide leadership in the development of community responses, and promote community awareness of needs and resources available. Policy HS-4: Foster a community that is free of discrimination and prejudice. Policy HS-S: Build support for and awareness of human services to create a community that values diversity, responds to the special needs of individuals and families, and shares the responsibilities and benefits of living in this City and region. ObjectiVe HS-B: Make human services more accessible to the Renton community. Policy HS-6: Encourage services to be accessible to all in the community by -3 removing any barriers, including, but not 8-20-04 City of Renton Human Services Element limited to site planning, cultural, language, communication, or location. Policy HS-7: Support the development and operation of facilities for human services, and where appropriate, seek opportunities to achieve efficiencies through agency co- location and coordination. One Stop Human Service Centers or multi- service centers allow individuals and families to access many services at one location. They are efficient because people are not traveling to multiple locations to receive help. Objective HS-C: Create a caring commnnity that nurtures and supports individuals, children and their families. Policy HS-8: Link services, such as transportation and child care, to jobs to improve the ability of people to obtain and retain employment. . Policy HS-9: Promote efficient transportation and supporting site locations to jobs and services, especially for lower- income people, while planning local and regional transportation systems and economic development activities. Policy HS-IO: Consider human services objectives in developing City regulations and codes. For example, enforcing code abatement may mean making people homeless. Ensuring there are community resources to assist these residents, before they are abated, is critical. Policy HS-ll: Collaborate and partner with non-profits, churches, employers, businesses, and schools. Policy HS-12: Support the ability of residents to obtain, and retain livable wage jobs. This includes, but is not limited to: job skills and occupational training, English as a Second Language classes, and communication skills. Objective HS-D: Preserve and protect the existing housing stock Policy HS-13: Maintain the City's Housing Repair Assistance Program for low and moderate-income homeowners. ' Objective HS-E: Utilize resources efficiently and effectively. Policy HS-14: The City's role'is to fund, advocate, facilitate, plan, and inform by continually engaging service providers and community organizations in dialogue regarding the functioning of the present service systems, the emerging needs of the community and the building of a complete system of services. The Human Services DivisiQn distributes general funds and Community Development -4 Block Grants. The staff and Advisory Committee members advocate for those who cannot do so for themselves. As planners, . needs are assessed and anticipated, and appropriate policy and program responses are developed. Staff facilitates in convening and engaging others in community problem solving to develop and improve services. We inform by educating and providing resources. a s •• 8-20-04 City of Renton Human Services Element Objective HS-F: Encourage collaborative partnerships between the City and.8chool Districts to identify and meet the needs of children and families. Policy HS-15: Encourage cooperation with school districts, focusing on schools areas with attendance in the City, in the development and utilization of schools as a focal point for the identification of needs and delivery of services to children and families. Objective HS-G: Participate in regional and local efforts, which address human services needs in the region and in the City. Policy HS-16: Support and actively coordinate with local, regional, and national efforts that address local human services needs and ensure that local programs complement programs provided at the state and federal level. -5 Policy HS-17: Continue the City's active participation in the South King County Human Services Forum, the South King Council of Human Services, and other regional groups. ;; / Rev. 8-20-04 ,. CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CAPITAL FACILTIES ELEMENT 2005to 2010 GOAL 1. Develop and implement the capital facilities plan for the City of Renton. IV-J Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS CAPITAL USE FACILITIES , Growth Management Act : .................. ; ................................................................................................................................ IV-4 Growth Projections .............................................................................................................................................................. IV-5 Capital Facilities Plan Policies ............................................................................................................................................ IV-6 , Transportation Capital Facilities Plan .................................................................................................................................. IV-7 Water Capital Facilities Plan ............................................................................................................................................. IV-14 I Wastewater Capital Facilities Plan ............................................ ~ ....................................................................................... IV-19 Surface Water Utility Capital Facilities Plan ............................. , ........................................................................................ IV-23 Park, Recreation and Open Space ...................................................................................................................................... IV-27 Public Safety Capital Facilities Plan ......................................... : ....................................................................................... .IV-39 I Fire Capital Facilities Plan ......................................................................................... ~ ....................................................... IV-40 Economic Development! Administration ........................................................................................................................... IV-44 IV-2 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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 aud 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, 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 JV-3 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT I 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.020(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 finapcial 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. 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» IV-4 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT GROWTH PROJECTIONS (Revised Text) 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. lnco[Qorated Adjusted Target/Capacity Capital Facilities Annualized Renton Reflecting Plan Planning Estimate 2001-2022 Growth! Annexation/Land Incorporated (21yrs) Use Changes in 2001 and Renton 2002 2005-2010 Forecast ('Jfowth 9,723_units None 2,778 units , 463_units 33,600 jobs 9,600 jobs 1,600 jobs (21 yrs) Growth Targets 6,198 units 4,523 units 1,428 units 238_units 27,597 jobs 26,736 jobs 8,442 jobs 1,407 jobs (19 yrs adjusted for remaining target) Capacity 11,261 units ·9,634 units NA NA established bv 32,240 jobs* 30,699 jobs Buildable Lands * additIOnal zoned capacity established for the Urban Center-North through the Boeing Comprehensive Plan Amendments in 2003 of 10,600,000 square feet of employment uses 360 hotel rooms and 3,225 units is not yet incorporated into the Buildable Lands data base. However, transportation infrastructure planning for the Urban Center- North is included in the next 6-year planning cycle for the Capital Facilities Element and will be reflected in the Transportation section of this Element. For the purpose of developing a six-year capital facilities plan for the period from -2005Jhrough 2010, 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. IV-5 Rev. 8-20-04 CITYOF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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 Aprill, 2001 was 51,140, exceeding forecast growth by 2,684 persons housed in l, 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 l, 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 exceed 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 seoond next phase of the planning cycle, 2002 to 20072005 to 2010 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 1,356 units and 8,022 jobs represented the minimum amount of growth expected for this period. The City's population in the year ~20 lOis forecast as 61,694 persons. " To be sure, growth will not occur precisely as projected over the next six-year or even the 21-year period. Recognizing this fact, the Capital Facilities Plan should be updated at least biennially. ill 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 1997 and 2000 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 provided. Subsequent reviews may result in revisions to the growth projections and the number and timing of capital facilities if the actual growth continues to exceed the forecast growth ' . As stated in Policy CFP-l, 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-l) in the annual budget process. IV-6 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN POLICIES Policy CFP-l. 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. Policy CFP-2. Level of service standards should be established 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 leeal-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 the district~ 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. .(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 Elementsfor policies related to this Capital Facilities Plan.) IV-7 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT TRANSPORTATION CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 20072005 -2010 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 revised its LOS policy in 1995 to emphasize 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 flltematives to SOY travel. IV-8 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPIT t\.L FACILITIES ELEMENT Fig. 7-1 Existing StreetfHighway System EXisting Street/Highway System (2003) Legend ,"" ~~ City limit .. F .1 ,.,.~. Renton _ Planning Area Transportation Plan IV-9 e t NotToScak Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPIT~L FACILITIES ELEMENT Figure 7-2 Traffic Flow Map IV-IO CITY OF RENTON 2002 TRAFFIC FLOW MAP Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPIT~L FACILITIES ELEMENT Fig. 7-3 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes IV-II 2022 Daily Traffic Volumes Legend Average ~ Daily Traffic . -.,./, CityUmit I I ", Transportation Plan Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT The LOS policy is based on travel time contours which in 'tum 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 King County 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 SOY, HOV and Transit as follows: Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOY HOV 2 Transit LOS (includes access time) Standard XX miles XX miles 2 times X miles = XX XX City-wide Level of Service Standard (Years 2002 and 2022) The 2002 LOS index is the basis for the 2022 standard. The average SOY 30-minute travel distance is forecast to decrease by 2022. Therefore, SOy improvements will need to be implemented to raise the SOY equivalent or a combination ofHOV 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. City-wide Level of Service Index (Year2002): Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOy HOV 2 Transit LOS (includes access time) Index 16.6 miles 18.7 miles 6.8 miles 42* *Rounded NOTE: The 1990 LOS Index of 49 (which was the basis for the 2010 LOS standard) presented in Renton's Comprehensive Plan adopted February 20, 1995 was based on raw travel distance 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. 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. IV-12 'I Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT City-wide Level of Service Standard (Year 2022): Average PM peak travel distance in 30 minutes from the city in all directions SOY HOV 2 Transit LOS (includes access time) 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. To check the progress toward the 2022 goal, each year the city will assess the level of service as a part of its annual Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). This assessment will further ensure that level of service is maintained for the current period as well as for 2022. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2002 20072005 -2010 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 Table 7-1 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 Table 7-2 are based upon the assumption that: gas tax and vehicle ta,,{ revenues would continue at no less than $0.35 million per year; that' grant funding would be maintained at ~_S+$3.90 million per year; . business license fees would continue at ~$1.88 million per year based on the current level of $1.80 million per year adjasted to $1.40 million per year to refleet devaluation due to inflation at4%per year, then adjusted upward to account for employment growth forecasts85% 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. Besides a mitigation fee payment as their fair share contribution toward mitigating cumulative impacts, developers are required to implement site-specific improvements to ensure that on-site and adjacent facility impacts are mitigated. IV-\3 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Previous TIP Projeet Title Costs 1 Street Overlay_Program 1,OSO,002 2 SR 167/SW 27th SlIStrander Bv 355,174 3 Strander Bv/SW 27th St Connect. 1705,460 4 SR 169 HOY • 140th to SR900 2,000,392 5 Renton Urban Shuttle RUSH 20,169 8 Transit Program 32,584 7 Rainier Av Corridor Study! Improv. 267,710 8 NE 3rdlNE 4th Corridor 323,892 8 Walkway Program 317 533 10 S Lake Wash. Roadway Improv. 1,500,000 11 SR 169 Corridor Study 12 South Renton Project 156,800 13 1-405 Improvements In Renton 42186 14 Pro ect Development/Predesign 271,363 15 NE 4th StlHoqulam Av NE 55,100 16 Rainier Av· SW 7th to 4th PI 80,000 17 Benson Rd • S 26th to Main 20,000 18 Arterial Circulation Program 195,308 19 Bridge btspection & Repair 120,411 20 Loop Replacement Program 57441 21 SJgn Rel'lacement Program 13,427 22 Pole Program 47,974 23 Sound Transit HOY Direct Access 46,523 24 Traffic Safely Program 233,791 25 Traffic Efficiency Program 250,505 28 CBD Bike & Ped, Connections 25,212 27 Arterial Rehab. Prog. 537,800 28 Duvall Ave NE 667,781 29 SunsetlDuvalllnterseclion 115,000 30 RR Crosslno Safetv Prog. 5,198 31 TOM Program 100,670 32 Trans Concurrency _ 1,784 33 Missing Links Program 36,350 34 GIS Needs Assessment 44,874 35 Grady Wy Corridor Study 5,000 36 Bicycle Route Dev. Program 24798 37 Lake Wash. Bv-Park to Coulon Pk 329900 38 btteragency Signal Coord. 26,572 39 Environmental Monitoring 223711 40 Trans-Yalley & S005 Creek Corr. 7,300 41 WSDOT Coordlnallon Program 18,857 42 1% for the Arts 20,000 43 Arterial HOV Program 125,354 44 Park-5unset Corridor 7889 4S Lind Av-5W 16th· SW 43rd 5,000 46 Benson Rd SIS 31st Sl 138,500 47 Logan Av Concrete Panel Repair 48 Carr/Mill Signal 49 Transit Prlorltv Signal System 1280,315 50 Transit Center Yldeo 26,391 51 Houser Wy S -Main to Burnett 52 Trans Yalley ITS SO,OOO 53 Lake Wash, Bv Slip Plane 629,400 54 Monster Road Brldae 500,000 55 SW 7th SULlnd Ave SW 273577 5& Duvall Ave NE -King County 547858 Total Sources 14938836 Table 7-1 2005 -20'10 Six-Year TIP , ' Total iProject Costs ! Total Project Costs i 2005 2006 2007 405,000 405,000 405,000 10000 10,000 10,000 800000 10,000 I 55,100 5000 '5,000 5,000 20,400 20,400 20400 20000 20,000 20,000 315300 807,500 236,600 250,000 250,000 I 50000 , 18,200 , 30,000 20,000 10,000 175,000 175,000 200,000 344,900 , 585,000 2,150000 855,000 459,400 ,2500 200000 200,000 200,000 40000 140,000 40000 20,000 20,000 20000 7,500 '7,500 7500 25000 48400 25,000 10,000 '5,000 80000 40,000 40000 251,900 114,400 75,000 50,000 50,000 10000 195 000 240,000 205,000 1,258 700 1692,000 381000 5000 '5,000 10,000 64.200 64.200 64.200 40,000 10,000 40000 30,000 30,000 30000 35,000 35,000 20000 35,000 120,000 80,000 20,000 18,000 18000 79,500 149100 12,000 85,000 75,000 50,000 5,000 10,000 10,000 10000 50,000 30,000 30000 10,000 10,000 25,000 50,000 390 000 5,000 :5,000 61500 , 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,000 I 10000 ; 5000 ,5000 10,600 12000 26423 , 1,311,342 2810,800 7,988485 9710700 3364300 IV-14 2008 405,000 10000 9394 540 3,680 000 5000 20400 261000 5017,000 250,000 1 8SO 000 240,000 200,000 200,000 615000 20000 7500 25,000 40000 30000 590000 340,000 64200 10,000 30,000 20000 230,000 , 110,000 25000 10,000 50,000 1691000 1914000 460,000 340,000 810000 28964640 Six-Year Total 2009 2010 Period Total Cost 405000 405000 2,430000 3480,002 10,000 5,000 55000 410,174 28000,000 26500,000 64,694540 66,400,000 2,3SO 000 6,095100 8095,492 5,000 5000 30000 50,169 20400 20,400 122400 154,984 2,964000 3,165,000 6450000 6,717,710 2,100,000 2,100000 10,339800 10663692 250000 250,000 1,486,600 1,804,133 14,300,000 23,800000 39,950000 41450,000 50000 50,000 258.200 415,000 60000 102,186 200,000 200000 1,150000 1,421,363 344900 400,000 3590,000 3,670,000 461900 481900 2SO,OOO 250000 1300000 1,495308 40,000 30,000 905,000 1025411 20,000 20000 120000 177,441 7,500 7,500 45000 58,427 25,000 25,000 173.400 221374 15000 61,523 40,000 40,000 280000 513791 30,000 30,000 531300 781,805 410,000 5,000 1115,000 1140212 230,000 180,000 1390,000 1927800 2,950700 3,618,481 381,000 ' 496,000 10000 30,000 35,198 64,200 64,200 385,200 485,870 10000 30,000 140,000 141,784 30,000 30,000 180000 216350 20,000 20,000 150,000 194874 1,810,000 1,020,000 3295,000 3,300,000 80000 80,000 326,000 350,798 228600 558,500 12,000 38572 25,000 25000 285000 508711 5,000 12,300 10,000 10,000 60000 78,857 30,000 30,000 220000 240000 20000 145354 1,059000 3,215000 3,222,889 626,000 2550 000 2,555,000 61,500 200000 460,000 ' 460000 400,000 10,000 785000 785,000 30,000 1,310,315 10000 36,391 810000 810,000 10,000 60,000 10,600 640,000 12000 512,000 26,423 300,000 4,122142 4,670,000 55821100 58367100 164214305 179153141 ITEM SIX·YEAR PROJECT COSTS: Project Development Precon Eng/Admin R-O-W (includes Admin) ~ Vl Construction Contract Fee Construction Eng/Admin Other Sub· TOTAL SIX·YEAR COST SOURCE OF FUNDS: 1/2 Cent Gas Tax Business License Fee * Eliminated by 1-776. VeAisle bis9Rse F:e9 * Grants In-Hand Mitigation In-Hand L.i.D.'s Formed Other In-Hand Sub· TOTAL SIX-YEAR FUNDED Grants Proposed Mitlflation Pro~osed L.i.D.'s Proposed Other Proposed Undetermined TOTAL SOURCES· FUN JED & UNFUNDED CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS DIVISION 2005 -2010 SIX-YEAR TIP SUMMARY OF FUNDING SOURCES Period Total 2005 2006 3550900 683400 674,100 8667940 1,753900 297400 10595242 1451242 127099323 3,404723 7663000 13235800 364,100 867200 1065100 329100 209000 164,214,305 7,986,465 9,710,700 2,100000 350,000 350000 9,600 000 1600000 1600 000 6529,110 1911329 2896133 6135 043 1995291 2004567 8,136645 2,129845 2,860,000 32,500,798 7,986,465 9,710,700 8726000 60000 8,054000 114873507 164,214,J()5 7,986,465 9,711b700 Period 2007 2008 589,600 514600 616100 5360540 3100000 1799000 17877 600 190100 1989400 169500 122500 3,364,300 28,964,640 350000 350,000 1600 000 1600 000 561 115 392,947 803,985 915,400 49200 2999200 3,364,300 6,257,547 3026 000 60000 1765000 17856093 3,364,300 . 28,964,640 2009 539,600 485000 2,044 000 47733500 4896500 122500 55,821,100 350000 1,600,000 767586 342900 49200 3,109,686 1700 000 3144 000 47867414 55,821,100 i 2010 I 549600, 155000' 4000000' 48621,500' 49285001 112500 58,367,100j , 350,000 1600 000 72 900' 49200' 2,072,100 4000 000 ! 3145000 49150000 58,367,100 r~ "'I N '<0 001-3 .... !.IIl» ~,g: = N ~ =0-...1 Q..I-', _. 0 N = 00 I1Q ~. 00, = -< = ~ "'I l» ~ ~ n::o ... ~ ~;: ON "!!i,? E!l~ z ~ £ ~ ;: n -3 t"l til t"l ~ a: t"l Z 0-3 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT WATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 20072005 -2010 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 aU 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 prt:!ssure 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 of20 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. 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 tr,eats 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. IV-16 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, lOOl 300noOs -2010 Based on the projected growth in population and employment by the year 2007, the existing supply of water will meet the level of service standard. As Table 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 Table 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 Table 8-2. IV-I7 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 8-1 On-Line Supply Sources -: Existing Water Supply Capacity Name Springbrook Well RW-l Well RW-2 Well RW-3 Well RW-5A Well PW-8 Well PW-9 Well PW-ll Well PW-12 Well PW-17 TOTAL GPM: gallon per minute MGD: million gallon per day Pumping Rate (gpm) 600 2,200 2,200 2,200 1,400 3,500 1,200 2,500 1,500 1,500 18,800GPM Total annual water rights are 14,809 acre-feet per year IV-IS Pumping Rate (mJ?d) 0.86 3.17 3.17 3.17 2.02 5.04 1.73 3.60 2.16 2.16 27.07MGD Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 8-2 Water Capital Facilities . Summary of Water Utilities Capital Improvement Projects 2005 -2010 (Costper Year x 1,000) 2005·2010 Prolect 10 Description .. .. ., . 2005 2006 2007 20Q8 .. 2009 2010 TOTAL Supply and Storage Improvements S·1 Emergency Water Interties with Adjacent Water Districts 200 200 S-2 Highlands 565 Zone 2 MG Reservoir 400 2,000 500 2,900 5-3 196 Zone Reservoir and Pump Station 200 500 2,000 1,000 3,700 S-4 196 Zone Emergenc~Power 400 400 800 S-5 Pipe Oversizing Reimbursements 40 40 40 40 40 100 300 Subtotal· Supply and Water Quality Improvements 440 2,440 1,340 540 2,040 1,100 7,900 2,000 1,400 3,400 Water Main Rehabilitation WM-1 Water Main Replacement 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,500 6,500 WM-2 Duvall Avenue NE Water Main Replacement 100 100 WM-3 Strander Boulevard SW Water Main Extension 500 500 Subtotal· Water Main Rehabilitation 1,100 1.000 1,000 1,000 1,500 1,500 7,100 Major Maintenance M-l Reservoirs Recoating, Cathodic Protection and Exterior Painting 100 100 50 50 50 50 400 M-2 Emer!lelLcyRe~onse Water Proiects 50 50 100 100 100 100 500 M-3 Water S~stem Security 40 40 40 40 40 40 240 M·4 Rehabilitation of Wells 1, 2, and 3 200 200 M-5 Automatic Meter Reading Conversion 200. 500 200 200 800 Subtotal-Major Maintenance Projects 190 190 390 890 390 390 2,140 Water Utility Regulatory Compliance Programs RC-1 Regulatory Compliance Programs I 120 I 801 90 I 901 90/ 195 I 665 Subtotal-Regulatory Compliance Programs 120 80 90 90 90 195 665 TOTAL WAtER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS 3.850 4,110 3,320 3,020 4,020 3,185 21,205 Sources of Funds 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Operating RevenuesIBonds 1,131,000 1,112,000 855;000 865,000 855,000 847,000 System Development Charges 470,000 470,000 470,000 470,000 470,000 470,000 . New Revenues Bonds 4,000,000 4,000,000 4,500,000 Public Works Trust Fund Loan 2,575,000 Special Assessment Districts 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 15,000 Total ·4,191,000 5,597000 i,340;OOO 5,350,000 1,340;000 5,832.000 IV-I9 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Figure 2-2 Existing Water Facilities : IV~20 A. Maplewood Water Treatment Facility B. We1l5A Water Treatment Facility C. 565 Zone Reservoir and Pump Station D. 196 Zone Reservoir and Pump Station E. Talbot Hill Water Mains Improvements F. Highlands Water Mains Improvements G. Earlington Water Mains Improvements Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT WASTEWATER CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 _20072005-20010 Inventory of Existing Facilities Renton's sanitary sewer system consists of about 168 miles of gravity sewers, 22 lift stations with associated force mains, and approximately 3,200manholes. Wastewater is discharged to regional facilities at 67 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 9-1. The City's Wastewater Utility serves approximately 13,400 customers, which includes approximately ninety-four percent of the city's population and eighty percent of the city's land area. The remaining six 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 its 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. 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 mamier. 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'ofRenton. The Wastewater Utility maintains a model of the sewer system. The model uses the size,type, and slope of the pipes to determine the capacity of the each component of the system. Because the slope of pipes can change segment to segment and flows may be merging at 'branches' the capacity of the system may change block by block. It is, therefore, not feasible to provide a standard statement on the capacity available in Renton's sewer system. Renton's Wastewater Utility reviews available capacity on a project-by-project level and plans for long-range capacity based upon the ultimate development of the adopted land use. 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. IV-21 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT For existing and projected development Renton uses the following criteria for flow projection: Average Single Family Domestic Flow 270 gallons ~er day per unit Avera~e Multi-Family Domestic Flow 190 gallons ~er 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~er acre per day Public 600 gallons per acre per day Manufacturing Park 2800 gallons per acre per day Peak Infiltration 600 gallons per acre per day Peak Inflow 500 gallons per acre per day Peaking factor for system average 2.0X 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. This criterion 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, 200 20072005-2010 Based on the forecasted growth in population and employment over the next 20 years, daily wastewater flows are , predicted to increase by about 10.5 million gallons per day (mgd.) This increase is expected to impact the entire system, : with the greatest impact expected to occur in the Lake Washington East Basin. In order to maintain the desired level of service and accommodate the projected growth, facility improvements will be needed in this basin over the next six 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, another 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: 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 JV-22 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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 below lists the projects needed along with the sources of funds for them for the period 2003-2008 based upon the six-year growth projections and the desired level of wastewater service. 2005 +2,000 Sources of Funds' Oper. RevlBonds 2,000 Licenses and Fees Other Taxes Grants Loans Not Funded Total 2,000 Table 9-1 Wastewater Capital Facilities 2005-2010 2006 2007 2008 -- IV-23 2010 - ---- Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Fig. 9-1 Sanitary Sewer Trunk Lines IV-24 (-1 ~&4KE fJO/lRN A. Sanitary Sewer Main Extensions J. Sunset Interceptor Phase II 2. Central Plateau Interceptor 3. Sunset Interceptor Phase III B. Major Maintenance I. Earlington Sewer Replacement C. Lift Station Replacement 1. Misty Cove Lift Station Rehabilitation 2. Lake Washington Flush Station Rehabilitat ion Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT SURFACE WATER UTILITY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 20072005-2010 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 ofa majority of these basins that discharge into either the GreenlDuwamish River or into Lake Washington. . The Surface Water Utility's service area within the existing City corporate boundaries is approximately 16 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 ofthe 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 100 miles of storm pipe systems including 7,059 catch basins, 1,629 manholes, 13 detention facilities and 11.5 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 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: 1. Federal AgencieslRegulations: a. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA): 1. Federal Clean Water Act 11. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit) b. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) 1. Nationwide/404 Individual Permit Requirements 11. Federal Emergency Management Act standards IV-25 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 2. State AgencieslRegulations: a. Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE): 1. Stormwater Discharge Permits (NPDES). 11. Temporary Water Quality Modification Permits iii. Water Quality Certification Permits IV. Coastal Zone Management Consistency Permit v. Shoreline Management Program (SMP) VI. The Puget Sound Water Quality Management Plan b. Washington State Department of Fisheries and Wildlife (WSDFW) 1. Hydraulic Project Approval Permits 3. Local AgencieslRegulations 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 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 standards specified in the city-adopted portions of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual require that: 1. Post-development peak rate of runoff be controlled to the pre-developed peak rate of runoff up to the IO-year design storm; 2. Water quality facility "Best Management Practices" (BMP's) such as biofiltration, wetponds, coalescing plate oil/water separators and erosion control measures be used; 3. Pipe systems be designed to convey the 25-year post-developed design storm without overflowing the system and pipe conveyance systems have adequate capacity to convey the IOO-year design storm provided that the' runoff is contained within defined conveyance system elements without inundating or over topping the crown of a roadway; and/or no portions of a building will be flooded; and/or if overland sheet flow occurs, it will flow through a drainage easement. . 4. New drainage ditches or channels be designed to convey at least the peak runoff from the IOO-year design storm without over-topping. 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, 2002 20072005-2010 The capital facilities estimated to be needed to solve current surface water management problems and to prevent future surface water management problems associated with tht? growth projected for the first six years of the Comprehensive Plan and the proposed sources of funding are listed in Table 10-1. 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; IV-26 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 2. Pennit fees and system development charges; 3. Revenue bonds; 4. Private latecomers agreements; 5. Surface Water Utility Special Assessment Districts; 6.· Low interest loans (state revolving funds, Public Works Trust Fund); 7. Cost-sharing interlocal agreements with adjacent jurisdictions and special districts; 8. Anny Corps of Engineers -Section 205 Small Flood Control Projects Program and other financial assistance programs available to municipalities authorized by Congress; 9. USDA Soil Conservation Service (SCS) Watershed Flood Prevention and Protection Act (public Law 566) and other SCS programs; 10. Grants from state and federal agencies such as: a. Washington State Department of Ecology Centennial Clean Water Fund; b. Washington State Department of Community Development Flood Control Assistance Account Program; c. Washington State legislative appropriations approved for Special Surface Water Utility projects (Cedar River Delta project); 11. Other unidentified federal, state and local grant programs. As is evident in Table 10-1 on the following page, the Surface Water Utility proposes to use all or any combination of the financial sources to fund the needed capital facilities. IV-27 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Sf Wt P . ts ur ace a er rO.lec Wetland Mitigation Bank Storm System Improvement Springbrook Creek Improvements Cedar River Basin Plan Green River Ecosystem Restoration May Creek Basin Plan Implement. Total Sources of Funds' Oper. Rev. Bonds Licenses and Fees Other Taxes Grants Revenue Bonds Surface Water Utility Rates System Development Charges Loans Not Funded Total Table 10-1 Surface Water Utility Capital Facilities 2005-2010 2005 2006 2007 2008 10 .50 1,300 - 1,055 630 220 1,000 150 850: 100 100 --120 400 10 '10 10 - 275 --- 1,500 1,540 1,750 1,500 , 600 600 583 500 I 400 440 583 500 500 500 583 500 1,500 1;540 1,750 .1,500 IV-28 2009 2010 - 700 100 - - - 800 1,000 266 333 266 333 266 333 800 1,000 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Figure 10-1 Surface Water Utility Capital Facilities 2005 -2010 'LAKE'BOREN A. Lower Cedar River Sediment Management B. Storm System Improvement and Replacement 1. SW 7th Street Storm Improvement Project (phase II) C. Green River Ecosystem Restoration Projects D. Springbrook Creek Floodplain Map Update E. May Creek Basin Plan Implementation IV-29 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE Inventory of Existing Facilities CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 _~00672005-2010 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. Table 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. Table 11-1 Park and Open Space Areas Summa!! T~e of Facilitv Renton PAA Planning Area Total Neighborhood Parks 92.49 22.70 115.19 Community Parks 130.36 90.00 220.36 Regional Parks 55.33 0.00 55.33 Open Space Areas ~683.1 236.00 901.21919.11 1 Linear Parks & Trails 91.21 0.00 91.21 Special Use Parks & Facilities 190.02 0.00 190.02 TOTAL 1,224.621 ,2 348.70 1 ,S+~.~21,591.22 42.52 Tables 11-2 and 11-3 on the following pages list the individual park and open space areas that comprise the categories summarized above. Table 11-2 details Renton's Parks and Open Spaces by category and Table 11-3 lists public land in Renton's P AA. The table lists the name of each park or open space, its size in acres, and its status as of January 2001. The locations of the individual park facilities listed in Table 11-2 are shown in Figure 11-1, which immediately follows ' the Table. I IV-30 I Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 11-2 Public Park and Open Space Areas in Renton Detailed Listing Park Neighborhood Parks (20) Earlington Park Glencoe Park Heather Downs Park Jones Park Kennydale Beach Kennydale Lions Park Kiwanis Park Maplewood Park Maplewood Roadside Park North Highlands Park Philip Arnold Park Riverview Park Sit In Park Springbrook Watershed Park Sunset .Court Talbot Hill Reservoir Thomas Teasdale Park Tonkins Park Tiffany Park Windsor Hill Park TOTAL Community Parks (7) Cedar River Park Cedar River Trail Park Highlands Park Liberty Park Narco Property Piazza & Gateway Ron Regis Park TOTAL Regional Parks (1) Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park TOTAL Open Space Areas (10) Black River Riparian Forest Cedar River Natural Area Cleveland Property Honey Creek -Lake Street May CreeklMcAskill May Creek Greenway Panther Creek Wetlands IV-31 Acres 1.54 .42 4.30 1.18 1.76 5.66 9.00 2.20 1.00 2.64 10.00 11.50 0.50 16.00 0.50 2.50 10.00 0.29 7.00 . 4.50 92.49 Acres 23.07 24.20 10.40 11.89 15.00 0.80 45.00 130.36 Acres 55.33 55.33 Acres 92.00 237.00 23:66 35.73 1.00 10.00 29.82 73.00 Status Developed Developed Undeveloped Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Undeveloped Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Undeveloped Developed Developed Developed Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped Undeveloped ------------------------------------------------~-- Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ! Renton Wetlands Springbrook Watershed EdlundlKorum Property TOTAL Linear Parks & Trails (7) Burnett Linear Park Cedar River Trail Honey Creek Trail Springbrook Trail S.W. 16th Trail Garden/16lhlHouser Lake Washington Blvd TOTAL Special Use Parks & Facilities (10) Boathouse Carco Theatre (31 0 seats) Community Garden/Greenhouse Highlands Neighborhood Center Maplewood Golf Course ; Maplewood Golf Course/RestaurantJPro S~op Maplewood Golf Course Driving Range I North Highlands Neighborhood Center Renton Community Center Renton Senior Activity Center 125.00 Undeveloped 38.00 Undeveloped 17.90 Undeveloped 665.21683.11 Acres 1.0 acre 4.5 miles 1.0 miles 2.0 miles .5 miles 1.0 miles 1.5 miles 10.5 Miles. 1 Acre Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed Developed 4,242 s.f. Developed 11,095 s.f. Developed .46 acres Developed 11,906 s.f. Developed 190 acres Developed 15,508 s.f. Developed 11,559 s.f; Developed 4,432 s.f. Developed 36,000 s.f. Developed 18,264 s.f. Developed 0.2 acres Developed Veterans Memorial Park TOTAL 113,'006181,825 Sq. Ft., 190.66 Acres , , CITY-WIDE TOTAL 1135.051,152.95 Acres 10.5 Miles 113,006181,825 Square Feet IV-32 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 11-3 Public park and open space areas in Renton's Proposed Annexation Areas (PAAs) Maplewood Community Park Site Petrovitsky Park Sub-Total (Community Parks) Sierra Heights Park Maplewood Park· Cascade Park Lake Youngs Park Detailed Listing 40.0 Acres 50.0 Acres 90.0 Acres 4.7 Acres 4.8 Acres 10.7 Acres 2.5 Acres Sub-Total (Neighborhood Parks) 22.7 Acres May Creek Greenway Renton Park Metro Waterworks Maplewood Heights Soos Creek Greenway Sub-Total (Open Space) Total, Public Park and Open Space Within Renton's Proposed 150.0 Acres 19.0 Acres 10.0 Acres 5.0 Acres 52.0 Acres 236.0 Acres Annexation Areas ............................................... 348.7 Acres 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. Table 11-4 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. IV-33 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 11-4 Specialized Facilities within the Renton City Limits Number Facility Ballfields City-owned: 1 Cedar River Park 1 Highlands Park 1 Kennydale Lions Park 1 Kiwanis Park 2 Liberty Park 1 Maplewood Park 1 Ron Regis 1 Philip Arnold Park 1 Thomas Teasdale Park 1 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 Number Facility Football/Soccer Fields City -owned: I 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 I Renton High School 1 Renton Stadium TOTAL IV-34 Comments 2 lighted Small Field Lighted Lighted 11 FIELDS Small Fields . Small Field Small Fields Small Fields 22 FIELDS Comments 1 lighted 1 lighted 7 FIELDS 1 lighted 7 FIELDS Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Tennis Courts City-owned: 2 Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park 2 Highlands Park 2 Kiwanis Park 3 Liberty Park I North Highlands Park 2 Philip Arnold Park 3 Talbot Hill Reservoir 2 Tiffany Park TOTAL 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 Swimming Pools Within the city limits but owned by others: I Hazen High School TOTAL Level of Service 2 lighted 3 lighted 2 lighted 17 COURTS IS COURTS Indoor I POOL 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 (NRP A). 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: I) 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 overall LOS standard for park and open space land established for Renton in its Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space plan is 18.58 acres/I,OOO population. The current LOS in Renton is . ~20.83 acres/1,OOO population. The current LOS within Renton's Potential Annexation Areas (P AAs) is only 6.9 acresll ,000, which reduces today's overall Planning Area LOS to -146914.17 acres/l,OOO. 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 P AA's. The recommended service levels for Renton were developed after discussions with City staff and the Park and Recreation Advisory Committee. 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. IV-35 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 1 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) -OVERALL , Park & Open Existing LOS Space Land Population (Acres/l,OOO) City of Renton ~1,l53 ~55,360 ~20.83 Renton's PAA's 348.70 50,600 6.9 Total Planning Area 1,48a·+12501.7 98,8f() 1 052960 l4.6914.17 Starting below, existing service levels and recommended standards by park types within Renton are given. Each park type compares the NRP A 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. IV-36 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 2 EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) -BY PARK TYPE Figures shown are in acres/l,OOO population IV-37 - - Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Park and Open Space Areas 1. Neighborhood Parks Definition: Neighborhood parks are small park areas (usually 2~lO 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 Existing LOS (Renton): Existing LOS (planning Area) Recommended LOS Standard: Comments: 1-2 Acres/1,OOO Population 1.8 Acres/1,OOO Population 1.1 Acres/1 ,000 Population 1.2 Acresll ,000 Population 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 thet:n devoted to active use. Sometimes, smaller sites with a singular purpose that maintain a community-wide focus can be considered community parks. NRP A Standard: Existing LOS (Renton): Existing LOS (Planning Area): Recommended LOS Standard: Comments: 5-8 acresll ,000 population 2.5 acres/I,OOO population 2.1 acresll ,000 population 2.5 acresll ,000 population' The low existing ratio reflects a past emphasis within Renton on neighborhood parks. While the recommended standard is well below the NRP A standard, it represents a shifting emphasis to community parks. IV-38 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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 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: Existing LOS (Renton: Existing LOS (planning Area): Recommended Standard: Comments: 5-10 acres/l,OOO population 1.1 acres/1,000 population 0.5 acres/1 ,000 population 1.08 acres/1,000 population 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 GolfCourse~ and the Cedar River Property. 4. Open Space Areas Definition: This type of park area is defined as general open space, trail systems, arid 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) Existing LOS (planning Area): Recommended LOS Standard: Comments: 13 acres/l,OOO Population 8.9 acreS/l,OOO Population 12.7 acres/l,OOO Population The recommended LOS Standard of 12.7 acres per 1,000 population represents an increase over the present situation, as several additional open space systems have been identified for preservation. A majority of this type ofland 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): Existing LOS (planning Area): Recommended Standard: Comments: 1.9 acres/l ,000 Population 0.9 acres/I,OOO Population 0.3 acres/1 ,000 Population 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. IV·39 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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): Existing LOS (Planning Area): Recommended Standards: 7. Total Park Land 3.7 acresll,OOO Population 1.8 acresll ,000 Population 0.8 acresll,OOO Population Presently, Renton has 1,179.951,197.85 acres of total park land within the city boundaries. Together with another 348.7 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 1,528.651,546.55 acres. NRP A Standard: Existing LOS (Renton): Existing LOS (Planning Area): Recommended LOS Standard: Comments: 15-20 acres/l ,000 Population ~21.63 acres/l,OOO PopUlation -l469l4.60 acres/l,OOO PopUlation 18.58 acresll,OOO Population 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 and will come to the City through the land development process. Specialized Facilities Below are the recommended levels of service for specialized recreation facilities. In addition to the NRP A standard and the existing facility ratio, an estim~te 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) NRP A 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: Existing Participation: Existing Inventory: Existing Facility Ratio: Recommended Standard: Comments 1 field per 10,000 population 75 % below average 26 fields .9 field per 3,000 population 1 field per 3,000 population Because of the extremely high existing facility ratio and the below average participation rate, the recommended standard--while substantially above the NRP A standard-is roughly the same as the existing facility ratio. IV-40 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 3. Tennis Courts NRP A Standard: Existing Participation: Existing Inventory: Existing Facility Ratio: Recommended Standard: Comments 1 court per 2,000 population 15 % below average 32 courts .9 court per 2,500 population 1 court per 2,500 population 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: Existing Participation: Existing Inventory: Existing Facility Ratio: Recommended Standard: Comments 5. Walking Trails Existing Participation: Existing Inventory: Existing Facility Ratio: Recommended Standard: Comments 1 pool per 20,000 population Average 1 indoor pool .4 per 40,000 population 1 pool per 40,000 population 16% above average 7.5 miles (off-street) .15 miles per 1,000 population .20 miles per 1,000 population 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, 2002 3007,2005-2010 Table 11-4 on 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 projected growth --and therefore, demand -- occurs. The Table also includes potential funding sources for each project, where known. IV-41 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ar rO.lects P kP . Black River Riparian Forest Cedar River Ball Field Lighting Cedar River Trail Extension Regis Park Athletic Field Expansion Heather Downs Development. Maplewood Community Park Dev. New Maintenance Facility Parks Contingency Plan North Highlands Community Center Pavilion Improvement Grant Matching Fund Carr Road Acquisition ~Henrv Moses Aquatic Center. Cedar River Trail Extension Golf Course Veteran's Memorial Park East Renton Plateau Acquisition North Highland RedeveloJlment TOTAL This SectIOn to Be Developed General Fund Licenses and Fees*-User Fees Other Taxes Grants Loans Not Funded TOTAL Table 11-5 Parks Capital Facilities 2005 -2010 2005 , 2006 2007 --- 200 - - 1,000 1,000 - 500 600 50 750 - 500 3,000 5,500 ¥003,000 ~O : - - 150 2,000 ---- 200 200 200 1,000 500 7.100 8,950 4,300 $2,100 $3,640 1,720 260 , 260 280 1,000 1,300 1,300 750 750 1,000 3,000 3,000 $7,100 $8,950 4,300 2008 2009 85 75 --- ---- --3,000 - ---- --- 200 200 1.000 500 1,000 2,285 3,775 485 815 660 1,300 1,300 500 1,000 2,285 3,775 *Includes Parks Mitigation Fees in 2001 and Golf Course fees to fund Golf Course Capital Improvements. IV-42 2010 2,100 600 2,700 300 1,300 1,100 2,700 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT PUBLIC SAFETY CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 _20072005-2010 Inventory of Existing Facilities The City of Renton provides police, municipal court, and jail services and facilities as part of its public safety responsibilities. Currently, all of these services and facilities are located on the city hall campus. Level of Service The police department has a total of 120 employees. Based on Renton's 2000 population of 48,270, the current level of service of police department employees to population is nearly 2.5 employees per 1,000 residents. The current level of service for officers is nearly 1.75 officers per 1,000 residents. With the population of Renton projected to grow to over 56,534 residents by the year 2006, the number of police department employees will have to increase to 140 to maintain the current level of service. It is also projected by the police department that with an increase in the general population would come an increase in the number of class I, II, and ill crimes and a related increase in the number of court cases and jail days and in the size of the average daily jail population. To maintain the current level of service for both the municipal court and the jail would require an increase in the staff at those facilities. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2001 20062005-2010 At the August 1999 meeting of the Valley Communications Board the mayors of the five owner cities (Auburn, Federal Way, Kent, Renton, and Tukwila) agreed to build a new 911 Center at a cost of $15,405,519. The Board has been collecting a surcharge on calls for the past two years for construction of a new facility. The net costs, with an assumption that a new dispatch system is not needed, will be $12,571,343. Each member city will be responsible for approximately $2.5 million of the construction costs. As of September 1999, the estimated annual costs of the debt will be approximately $300,000 over 20 years. In the Capital Facilities Plan this cost is divided evenly between ,the Police and Fire Departments. Table 12-1 P bl" S f U IC a ety ProJects 2 5 00 2006 20 07 2008 20 09 2010 Valley Communications Center* $150 $150 $150 $150 Total $150 $150 $150 $150 . . . *Cost shown m 2001-2005 CapItal FaCIlItIes Plan IS splIt between the PublIc Safety and FIre Functtons . Source of Funds 2005 2006 2007 2009 2010 Licenses and Fees $150 $150 $150 ' $150 Total $150 $150 $150 $150 IV-43 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT FIRE CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 200! 20072005-2010 Inventory of Existing Facilities The Renton Fire Department provides fire protection services from five locations: Station 11 which is the main fire station across from Historic City Hall 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; and Station 13 which is located in the Talbot Hill area and serves the southeast portion of the city. 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 car. Station 12 is staffed by 5 personnel and is equipped with one engine company and one aid car. Station 13 'is staffed by three personnel and one engine company and one aid unit. Station 14 is staffed by three personnel and equipped with an engine and I 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; Response time is an important criterion for level of service because there is a direct relationship between how long a fire burns and the temperatures created by the fire. Eventually temperatures become so high that "flashover" occurs, a process in which all combustible material in a room or building ignites simultaneously. Reaching a fire before flashover occurs is an important consideration in fue suppression. Studies have shown that under normal dispatching procedures fire crews have about four to six minutes to reach a fire before flashover occurs. Fire flow is the second criterion for measuring the level of service for fue suppression. 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 number and training of firefighters also must fit with the department's strategic or tactical approach to fighting fires. The Renton fire department uses an aggressive attack strategy as opposed to a defensive approach strategy. lV-44 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT In its Fire Department Master Plan, the City established the following standards for level of service: 1. Acceptable response time is defined as having the first responding units arrive on the fire scene in five minutes or less. 2. Acceptable response time is defined as having the second responding units arrive on the fire scene in ten minutes or less. 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 personnel is defined as having five firefighters on site in first response and ten firefighters on site in second response. 5. Acceptable personnel is also defined as having sufficient personnel available through mutual aid and automatic response agreements with neighboring jurisdictions to efficiently and successfully extinguish the larger and more complex fires in residential, commercial, institutional and industrial buildings. Needed Capital Facilities and Funding Plan, 2002 30072005-2010 With the exception of a few isolated small areas of the city, the "five firefighters in five minutes" level of service standard is being met. With regard to the "ten firefighters in ten minutes" level of service standard, this standard is being met in virtually the entire city. 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 . . Given the population and employment growth projected for the year 2006, it is anticipated that some actions may be needed over the next six years to maintain the response time level of service standards. 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 three firefighters, seven days a week. This means an additional fifteen firefighters along with the purchase of equipment. The total project includes the purchase ofland, 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. As pointed out in the Fire Department Master Plan, a new station 15 closer to 1-405 and 44th would provide five- minute response time coverage to the entire area. Over the next six years, some single family and multi-family growth is projected for the KennydalelHighlands 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. The solution recommended in the Fire Master Plan i&-was to relocate Station 12 further to the east. This was accomplished in 2004. Along ''lith the building ofIn the next six-year planning period, the City will build Station 15, the City will rebuild Station 12 to the eastJo better serve the growing Highlands area. This project includes purchasing land, design, and construction. 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 IV-45 Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT 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. Station 13 was built as a temporary facility, until a decision was made whether to build a new station or collocate with Fire District 40. With the decision not to collocate a station, the need for a new facility is apparent. The project includes design and construction only. Fire Projects Station 13 Station 15 Valley Communications Center Total TIlls section to be developed Sources of Funds: General Fund Licenses and Fees Bonds Grants Other Taxes Not Funded Total Table 13-1 Fire Capital Facilities 2005 -2010 2005 2006 99,0 3,500 350 4,500 150 150 1,490 8,150 , 1.340 800 ]50 150 : : 1.490 8,150 IV-46 2007 2008 2009 2010 - -- - -- 150 150 150 150 ]50 150 150 150 I Rev. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT/ADMINISTRATION CAPITAL FACILITIES PLAN 2002 20072005 -2010 The Eoonomio Development Division of the City is planning three major eapital projeets to support growth and eeonomie expansion during the 2002 to 2007 planning period. The Port Quendall de:velopment is a 20 aere site 9n the southeast shore of Lake Washington. The projeet ineludes hazardous waste elean up planning, elean up, shoreline park development and sale of the upland property for private development. The site is eontaminated with eoal tar and creosotes. It needs to be restored to an environmentally safe habitat site for fish and wildlife and an area that would provide opportunity for public acoess to the shoreline. ' The Performing Alis Center is a nevI eapital projeot emerging out ofa unique partnership bet\veen the oommunity, the City of Renton, and the Renton Sehool Distriot to transform the Renton High Sohool Auditorium into a state of the art, 550 seat faeility for the performing arts. This allianoe eapitalii'ied on the planned upgrade of the high sohool auditorium and mobilii'ied efforts to raise $1.5 million. The City has pledged $400,000(whioh '.",ill be matched by community eontributions) and set aside $50,000 for the arohiteotural design of the faoility. The rest o[tl1e funds will oome from the oommunity and from matching grants from foundations. Neighborhood Grant Program provides $50,000 to be distributed in small matching grants to organized neighborhood associations that draw membership from a commonly recognized geographic neighborhood 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. IV-48 Rev. 8-20-04 . CITY OF RENTON CAPITAL FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 14-1 Economic Development! Administration Facilities 2002 30072005 -2010 Economic Development Projects 2005 2006 2007 Neighborhood Grants $50 $50 $50 Port Quendall Total $50 $50 $50 Sources of Funds: General Fund $50 $50 $50 Total $50 $50 $50 IV-49 2008 2009 2010· $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 $50 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT v. UTILITIES ELEMENT GOAL 1. 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG, DRAFMD-Utilities.doc V-J Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page General Policies ...................................................................................................... , .................. V -3 City Managed Utilities ............................................................................................................... V-4 Non-City Managed Utilities ....................................................................................................... V-5 Water Supply ........................................................ , .................................................................... V-6 Wastewater System .............................. : ..................................................................................... V-IO Surface· Water ............................................................................................................................ V-17 Solid Waste ........................................................... · ................................................ : .................... V-23 I Electrical Systems ................................................. : ..................................................................... V -30 Natural Gas and Fuel Pipelines ................................................................................................... V-35 Telecommunications ........................................ : ......................................................................... V-40 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-2 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 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 stormwater utility services for citizens residing within the city limits and by agreement with other purveyors for some areas located outside of the City's boundaries. Renton contracts with a private hauler for collection of solid waste andresidential recycling. Other utility services which affect the City and are discussed within this Draft Background Report 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 plan Element for policies related to the Utilities Element.) I General Policies 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-I. 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 harmful 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. 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-S. 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-3 -------------------------------------------- Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT Policy V-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 V-lO. Where appropriate require reasonable; landscape screening of site-specific above-ground ' utility facilities in order to diminish visual impacts. Policy V-ll. Identify utility capacity needed to accommodate growth prior to annexation. Do not annex areas where adequate utility capacity cannot be provided. City-Managed Vtilities I Discussion: The above general policies are designed to insure that utility services are safely and efficiently provided, and are constructed in a environmentally sound manner which 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-B: Provide and maintain safe, reliable knd adequate utility facilities and services for the City's current and future service area to meet peak anticipa~ed 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 V-13. Coordinate the extension of utility services with expected growth and development. Policy U-l4. Apply level of service standards consistently throughout the service area for city- owned or managed utilities. Ifnecessary, this level-of-service standard may be phased-in over time. Policy U-lS. Preference should be given to capital facility improvements which 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-l6. Encourage the use of water and energy conservation technologies throughout the ' City. 'I I Policy V-l7. 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 V.,.l8. Water, sewer and stormwater facilities and services should be in place prior to occupancy of development projects. Policy u,:·l9. Implementation and coordination programs for the improvement, phasing and financing of water, sewer and stormwater infrastru~ture 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 stormwater 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFnHD-Utilities.doc I ! V-4 I I , . Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 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 infrastructure 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 of the 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. Non-City Managed Utilities Policy U-2S. Pursue future annexation of all hmds 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. Discussion: The above general policies are designed to insure 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 the Comprehensive Plan and the City's ability to implement it. City utility facilities expansion is to further the goals of the City not to expand utility facilities. Objective U-C: Ensure non-City managed utilities provide service corinnensurate 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-2S. 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. 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp P\an\Amendments\GMA Update\E\ements & Vision\HEARING DRAFl\HD-Utilities.doc V-5 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL.... ~NT 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 Water Supply i i 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. Discussion: The above policies are designed to insure Renton is aware of proposed non-city managed utility facility upgrades and that utility purveyors arefully aware of the City's needs. Objective U-D: Provide, protect and !llaintain a consistent, ample arid safe watersupply for the City and future service areas. Existing Conditions The Renton Water Utility is operated as a self-supporting enterprise utility under the direction of the Mayor arid City Council. Operations are guided by policies of the City of Renton Comprehensive Water System Plan, 1998. 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 i-I). In addition, the City supplies water on a wholesale basis to the Bryn MawrlLakeridge 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 of the City. Agreements between Renton and adjacent purveyors allow Renton to serve some areas outside .of the 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. . . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-6 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELElh_,~T 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 57,409 persons (or 25,956 households) living within the current city limits by the year 2010; and, 77,752 persons (or 29,128 households) in the annexation area. The total forecast population of Renton's Planning Area is expected to be 135,161 persons (or 55,084 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. Ifno other supply sources are developed, the additional supply from the three wells will adequately meet demands until at least 2020, FIG. 2-1 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFI\HD-Utilities.doc V-7 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEM.,.,iT Policy U-3S. 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-39. Water supply sources (i.e. wells, and Springbrook Springs) should be protected from uses and activities, which have been determined to be hazardous to these sources. Discussion: Groundwater is Renton IS primary source of drinking water. Nearly all of the City's water supply comes from the shallow Cedar Valley Aquifer and from 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 and from 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. Policy U-40. Continue to promote the efficient and responsible use of water through conservation and public education programs. Policy U-41. New alternative source supplies of potable water should be developed through wells or other sources. Policy U-42 .. The City's Water Utility will strive to meet ~aximum day demand during a reasonable "worst .case" supply system failure. 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 Sphere of Influence boundary. Policy U-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. Discussion: The City must assure that water supplies will be adequate to serve future growth. This can be accomplishedthroughprudent 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 ejJ1uentfor 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 ejJ1uent discharged into them from wastewater treatment plants. Renton is integrating a reuse program into its water resource management program. 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-4S. 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 arid/or State Department of Health that a public health'emergency exists oris imminent. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision \HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-9 -------------------,----------------------------- Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELL _~NT Policy U-46. Renton Water Utility will serve areas annexed to the City, which do not have existing municipal supply. Policy U-47. Renton will not supply water to areas annexed with existing municipal water supply. 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. Discussion: 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 supplyingfuture growth in areas outside of Renton IS 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. 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 Wastewater System 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 bfthe community. Discussion: 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-E: Provide and maintain a sanitary sewer collection system that is consistent with the public health and water quality objectives of the State ofW~shington and the City of Renton. Existing Conditions The Renton Wastewater Utility is operated as a self-supporting enterprise utility under the direction ofthe Mayor and City Council. Operations are guided by policies of the City of Renton Long-Range Wastewater Management Plan (current version adoptedOctober, 1999). H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Yision\HEARING DRAFT\HD-Utilities.doc : Y-IO Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELElh~l-1T 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 10,200 customers (residential and business) which includes approximately ninety-four percent (94%) of the City's population and eighty ( 80%) percent of the City's land area. The remaining six percent (6%) 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 of the 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 183 miles of gravity sewers, 23 lift stations with associated force mains, and approximately 3,000 manholes. Wastewater is discharged to regional facilities (Metro) at 67 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. The location of Renton's sewer interceptors and lift stations, as well as King County's sewer trunk lines are shown on Figure 3-2. 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. . In 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 (backup) in low-lying areas through manhole covers and backup side sewer connections into homes and businesses. . 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRArnHD-Utilities.doc V-ll Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL1._.4.ci:NT 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFI\HD-Utilities.doc I V-12 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELL_ .• ENT FIG. 3-2 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Visio~\HEARING DRAFT\HD-Utilities.doc V-14 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEJ\II. ... ,~T 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 for through the Sunset Interceptor. These improvements are currently scheduled in the Wastewater 6-year Capital Improvement Program. The most significant amount of increased flows 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-1990's. 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 has within its current program a project to update its modeling to fit recently completed flow analysis performed system wide as part of King County's regional Inflow and Infiltration Study. This update to our 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 system's 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-goingjnspection, 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 ofthe 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 remainder of 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 50-plus year old mains are in the 20-year CIP. 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 2004/05 update of the Wastewater Long-Range Management Plan will further evaluate the priority of replacements. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFIiHD-Utilities.doc V-IS Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL," .lNT 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 of the system; and protecting the environment. 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 U-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 I occurs. Policy U-58. Adequate sewer service capacity should be assured prior to the approval of any new i development application (e.g. short plat, long plat, multifamily, commercial and industrial 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. Annexation policies will not conflict with adopted state regulations and guidelines. 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 shall 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. Ifimprovements are necessary, they may be accomplished by developer installation or LID as a condition of the annexation. Policy U-67. All property owners in unincorporated King County and Renton's P AA, that are granted City sanitary sewer services should be required to sign a covenant to annex. Policy U-68. In areas where annexation is logical, extensiop.s of service should be contingent upon request for annexation. An area shall be considered logical for annexation if it can satisfy city, county and state criteria for annexation. The City shall actively pursue annexation of areas where annexation is logical. 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 shall not be established within another sewer service district, which provides sanitary sewer service except by agreement with that sewer service district. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-16 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEl\Il~l"T 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 of the City's sanitary sewer system. Policy U-71. The City Council shall 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, Surface Water county, and state regulations and when public sewers are not available. 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 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. Objective U-F: Provide and maintain surface water management of drainage systems to minimize impacts on natural systems and to protect the public, property, surface water bodies, fish habitat, and ground water from storm water runoff water quantity and quality problems. Existing Conditions Renton's Surface Water Utility was organized to meet specific ordinances, regulations and to insure 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 Urban Growth Boundary (annexation area) also affect the surface drainage system. This potential annexation area is currently serviced by King County. As areas within the Urban Growth Boundary are annexed into the City, Renton will assume management of their surface water services. 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 ofthe 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision \HEARING DRAFI\HD-Utilities.doc V-17 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELL . .lNT 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 which 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-l channel), storm sewers, detention facilities, open channels, and other protective works. I 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 GreenlDuwamish 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 are now beginning to be implemented. Existing Capacity of Facilities The existing surface water drainage system is meeting capacity requirements under normal conditions. However, in some areas of the 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, which have occurr~d 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HO-Utilities.doc V-JS Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL.... _ANT Other problem areas within the City 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, which are, undersized for current flows from their tributary uplands. North of Downtown, both the Gypsy Creek Basin and the North Renton Basin 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 ofI-405. Floorl;ing 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 two factors. In areas where growth has occurred, or will occur, the facilities must be designed to detain flows, and sized to convey any increased storm flows. Additionally the facilities require regular maintenance to prevent debris and blockages, which impair the system's ability to function properly, and routine obs'ervation to insure they operate as designed during high flows. Thus, reliability is a function of proper sizing and maintenance. 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 (ClP) 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 I current Surface Water Utility 6-year ClP 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, which require the implementation of storm water , quantity and quality Best Management Practices (BMP's) and controls as part of the approval of a project to mitigate the project's storm and surface water impacts during and after construction. These standards include erosion and ' sedimentation BMP's during construction, flow coqtrol, 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 King County Surface Water Design Manual as the design standard that projects must comply with to mitigate impacts to surface water. The Washington State Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for Western Washington (August 2001) also provides a design standards and BMP's to mitigate impacts to surface water from new and redevelopment projects. The City of Renton is a Phase 2 community under the Clean Water Act National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program. 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 late 2004 or early 2005, once Ecology completes development ofthe permit. The NPDES Phase 2 program requires the implementation of the following six minimum control measures: 1. Public Education and Outreach on Stormwater Impacts 2. Public InvolvementiParticipation 3. Illicit Discharge Detection and Elimination 4. Construction Site Stormwater Runoff Control 5. Post-Construction Stormwater ManagemeI)t in New Development and Redevelopment H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRArnHD-Utilities.doc V-20 , ' Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEM~l"T 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 Stormwater Managemerit Manual for Western Washington. The City's adopted wetland, stream buffer, steep slope and flood hazard critical area ordinances, shoreline regulation and other development regulation, which 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 andwetlands in the City. The City currently operates a storm system maintenance program, which includes cleaning catch basins, pipes and other facilities, along with a vacuum street sweeping program.. The maintenance programs removes sediment and pollutants from the City owned and operated storm systems and streets, which reduces flooding and reduces 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 Boundary. 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. Although peak flows are to be regulated to pre-development levels, total volumes of flow will increase under the land use plan 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 increasing 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 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFnHD-Utilities,doc V-21 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELl. __ ~NT Many of the existing facilities within the City limits will require modifications to increase capacity and detention. All facilities should 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 onsite 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 Area's (WRJA) 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. In addition, new development, particularly in fill development, may increase surface flows beyond existing facility capacity, requiring the enlargement of facilities downstream of the 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 Zones 1, Zone 1 Modified and 2 Development projects located in either Zone 1, Zone 1 Modified or Zone 2 of the APA are required to pass additional City review to insure the projects do not produce water quantity and/or quality impacts that may affect the aquifer. 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 2020. This includes substantial development and redevelopment of the Downtown. Portions ofthis area are within Zone I of Renton's APA. Zone I 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 I Modified requirements affect much of the northern and eastern portions of Renton. These requirements are not as stringent as Zone I requirements and generally require that lining of conveyance system and water quality facilities to protect groundwater in areas with relatively porous soil.. The AP A 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. ' Policy U-74. Design storm drainage systems to minimize potential erosion and sedimentation , problems, and to preserve natural drainage systems I including rivers, streams, flood plains, lakes, ponds and wetlands. Policy U-7S. 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 shall be discouraged. If no other option is available, such development should follow specific design standards to minimize impacts to the natural watercourse and the degradation of water quality, aquatic habitats and H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFf'lHD-Utilities.doc V-22 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEM.t.l.jT the effectiveness of the local natural drainage system. Policy U-77. Promote and support public education and involvement programs, which address surface water quality and other surface water management issues. Policy U-7S. 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. Discussion: Natural hydrologic systems play an integral role in effective surface water management. Engineering techniques can control much of the 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. Policy U-79. Work towards protecting surface water resources from pollutants entering via the storm drainage system. Policy U-SO. Work towards protecting ground water resources from pollutants entering via the storm drainage system. Solid Waste Policy U-S1. 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, protect surface water and groundwater quality, and fish habitat. Policy U-S2. Coordinate with adjacent cities, counties, the state and federal agencies in the development and implementation of the Federal Clean Water Act's National Pollution Eliminating System Phase 2 Permit for Municipal Separate Stormwater Sewer Systems. Policy U-S3. Existing natural drainage, watercourses, ravines and other similar land features should be protected from the adverse effects of erosion from increased storm water runoff. Discussion: Surface water can dissolve and transporttoxinsfrom the human environment as well as carrying eroded materials. Renton's municipal water supply as well as downstream water bodies must be protected from these water borne contaminates through prudent management practices. Policy U-S4. Storm drainage programs should be coordinated with adjacent local and regional jurisdictions. Objective: U-G: To provide a responsible, comprehensive waste management program which includes economic efficiency, environmental sensitivity, and responsiveness to the needs of the community. The City should pursue a reduction of the overall waste stream, recycling, and long-term waste handling and disposal solutions. 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-23 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEh~~NT State law also gives Renton the authority to contract for collection of residential recyclables and yard waste. Curbside collection ofrecyclables is available to all single family, and duplex residents of the City, and yard waste collection is available to all single family and d\lplex residents with the exception of mobile home park residents. On-site collection of recyclables is available to all multi-family residents (triplex, fourplex and above). The Solid Waste Utility provides collection containers for all of these programs. The recycling and yard waste collection programs are voluntary. The City contracts with Waste Management-Rainier 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 divert,ed by waste reduction or recycling activities. King County regulates the types of waste accepted at its facilities and disposal rates for its facilities. 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 1992 goal of thirty-five percent (35%) waste reduction and recycling under the Plan. ' H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Visio?\HEARlNG DRAFI\HD-Utilities.doc V-24 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL1. •.• ENT Renton works cooperatively with other jurisdictions in the region to implement the Local Hazardous Waste Management Plan (LHWMP). Participants in the LHWMP include thirty-one (31) suburban cities, the City of Seattle, King County, the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro), and the Seattle-King County Department of Public Health. The LHWMP provides for a regional program to manage hazardous wastes generated in small quantities by households and businesses in King County. To provide funding for the LHWMP, 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 ofNE 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 oflarge 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 Figure 5-1 illustrates the location of the transfer statIon, landfill, and construction demolition and land clearing (CDL) transfer facility within the City's Planning Area. King County's Renton Transfer Station is located in the Renton Highlands. A majority of the solid waste geherated in Renton is transported there by the City's contractor, Waste Management Rainier. Current capacity of the station is 350 tons per day, or 126,700 tons per year. The vehicle capacity for the Transfer Station is 140,000 tons annually, with a daily average capacity of 387 tons. A majority of the vehicles which utilize the Transfer Station are garbage trucks from waste hauling companies. Regional Disposal's Black River Transfer & Recycling Center (a Rabanco facility), located at 501 Monster Road SW, opened in late 1993. Under a ten-year contract with King County, this facility accepts construction, demolition and land clearing wastes from businesses and haulers only. They estimate receiving 250,000 to 300,000 tons of CDL material per year. Previously, the Mt. Olivet landfill accepted CDL for a period of many years. This site closed in 1991 after reaching maximum capacity, and it is not known when or if the facility will be accepting future CDL. Once the Rabanco facility is operational, the Mt. Olivet facility may also be restricted from accepting most County- generated CDL. Waste Management's Eastmont Transfer Station in South Seattle currently receives a portion of the solid waste generated in Renton. The peak tonnage handled at this facility in the past seven years was 169,000 tons in 1990. The City recognizes that this landfill has not been 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 drinking 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 ground water pumping to remove contaminants. Identified areas of H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\HD-Utilities.doc V-26 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMJ!.NT contamination would be monitored and treated until 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 45 million cubic yards, leaving adequate room to accommodate the County's solid waste in the twenty-year planning period. There is room to construct additional capacity, increasing the area available to 355 acres, and the remaining capacity by 12.4 million cubic yards to 56.4 million cubic yards. At the current level of thirty-five per cent (35%) waste reduction and recycling, Cedar Hills will be able to accept solid waste until 2013. Recyclables collected from single family, duplex and multi-family residents in the City are taken to Waste Management's Recycle America processing plant in Seattle. Recycle America, currently handles 275 tons of material per day. The facility's estimated capacity is 300 tons of recyclable materials per day. Yard wastes collected from single family and duplex residents in the City are currently taken to Iddings, Inc., located in Kent, and Cedar Grove Recycling in Maple Valley. Iddings, Inc.'s composting facility currently handles 100 tons of yard waste per day. The facility's peak capacity is estimated to be 200 tons of yard waste per day; Cedar Grove currently handles between 700 and 800 tons of yard waste per day. They are permitted by the Seattle-King County Health Department to have 250,000 cubic yards of organic material on-site. The City's residential yard waste collection program has diverted over 28 per cent of the residential waste stream per year, and more than seven per cent (7%) of the City's total waste stream annually since it began in 1989. Yard waste makes up only 0.9 per cent of the remaining residential solid waste stream, therefore any increase in diversion would be minimal. The Solid Waste Utility plans to explore the possibility of implementing a mobile home park and multi-family yard waste collection program in 1994. Food waste makes up almost thirty-five per cent (35%) of the residential waste stream after recyclables and yard wastes are diverted. The Solid Waste Utility plans to implement a pilot food waste composting program in 1994 and 1995 to assess the feasibility of diverting this material from Renton's residential waste stream. Diversion of food waste from the commercial waste stream may also be considered. Reliability of Existing Solid Waste Services and Facilities The services of the City's solid waste and recycling collection contractor, Waste Management -Rainier, have been very reliable since the term of the contract began 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. As the City recently completed negotiations with Waste Management -Rainier, which extended the term of the contract to 1999, interruption of service due to a contract dispute is not likely. At this time, the capacities of the Renton Transfer Station, the Waste Management of Seattle Transfer Station and the Cedar Hills Landfill are sufficient, and any regulatory issues are being addressed by the appropriate agency. The capacity of Recycle America for processing recyclables and the capacity of Iddings, Inc. and Cedar Grove Recycling for compo sting yard wastes are both adequate to meet the City's needs. Forecasted Conditions Future Utility Service Areas H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFliHD-Utilities.doc V-27 Rev 8-20-04 I . CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL ENT The City's Solid Waste Utility will continue to provide solid waste collection to all residents and businesses within the city limits. Curbside collection ofrecyclables and yard waste will continue to be available to all single family and duplex residents in Renton, and multi-family residences will be eligible for on-site collection of recychlbles, if economically feasible. Yard waste collection will, when practical, be offered to mobile home complexes and some multi-family complexes. When annexations take place, the franchise hauler in,the annexed area has authority to collect solid waste for a period of up to five years. After five 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 all areas in the County, both incorporated and unincorporated, disposal facilities are anticipated to be adequate should the City annex areas of unincorporated King County. Locatiolt altd Capacity of Future Facilities According to the 1992 King County Comprehensive ~olid Waste Management Plan, the County anticipates closing the Renton Transfer Station by 2010, after expanding the Bow Lake Transfer Station in Tukwila or building another transfer facility in the Tukwila area. This change will force the City's contractor to transport the City's solid waste to either the Factoria Transfer Station in Bellevue, or the Bow LakeITukwila Transfer Station. It is expected that either of these locations would have the capacity to handle Renton's solid waste. Transportation costs associated with this change will result in increased rates. The Plan also recommends that King County study the possibility of privatization of the transfer system. King County's Cedar Hills Landfill will most likely be the last regional landfill located in the County, given environmental concerns and community resistance. If the goal of 50% waste reduction and recycling is reached, the facility will be able to operate until 2016. If the County attains the goal of65% waste reduction and recycling in the year 2000, Cedar Hills landfill will be operational until 2019. Under the 1992 King County Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan, waste export possibilities will be explored by the King County Solid Waste Division, and a decision will be made in the 1995 Plan period. While siting of another landfill in the County is possible, environmental issues and community resistance make it unlikely. Waste Management's Recycle America processing plant in Seattle will continue to receive Renton residents' recyclables as long as the City contracts with Waste Management for collection. To increase their overall processing capacity, Waste Management plans to divert paper generated in north King County and south Snohomish County from the Seattle plant to its Woodinville transfer station for processing. This change would allow the Seattle plant to handle more recyclable material generated in south King County. The amount of yard wastes collected through the City's program is not expected to increase significantly even if services are extended to multi-family complexes and mobile home parks. Therefore, capacity of the two existing yard waste composting facilities in the County should be sufficient to meet future needs. Waste Management is currently seeking a site for a yard waste composting facility, which could be used by their King County operations. If they do open such a facility while they are under contract to collect the City's residential yard wastes, those materials will most likely be diverted to the new composting facility .. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFnHD-Utilities.doc V-28 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT 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, 2008. 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 of the existing agreement. Interloeal Agreements Chapter 70.95 RCWrequires 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 of the 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 will occur 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. Future Regional Purveyors within Renton City Limits The number of private companies collecting recyclables from businesses in Renton will most likely fluctuate according to the amount and type of recyclables generated by Renton businesses. The private recyclers' success will also depend on finding viable markets for recyclable materials. If the City enters into a contract for collection of recyclables from businesses, it will most likely have a negative impact on private recyclers. Reliability Annexations to the City, and the closure of the Renton Transfer Station are not expected to have a significant impact on the ability of the City's contractor to provide reliable solid waste, recycling and yard waste collection services. The current contractor, Waste Management -Rainier, Inc., will most likely move their operations site to a location outside the City limits in the future, possibly making City collection routes less convenient for their drivers. If the relocation of their operations site affects their ability 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 facilities in King County, Iddings and Cedar Grove, may have problems handling significant increases in the amount of organic waste collected in the future. Policy U-85. Provide and maintain an adequate system of solid waste, recycling collection, disposal and handling to meet existing and future needs. Policy U-86. 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-87. Reduction of the 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-88. Where economically feasible and legally acceptable, City-wide collection of recyclable materials should be supported and promoted .. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFf\HD-Utilities.doc V-29 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL.E;IVlENT Policy U-89. The proper handling and disposal of solid waste should be required to protect public health and safety. Policy U-90. Contamination ofland, air, and water should be minimized or eliminated. Policy U-91. Coordinate with agencies in the region on educational and other programs for the safe management and disposal of hazardous household wastes. Policy U-92. Support products and practices, which offer safe and effective alternatives to the use of potentially hazardous substances to reduce the total amount of hazardous waste. Electrical System Policy U-93. Actively support the creation of markets for products made with recycled materials. Policy U-93.1. Actively support regionally coordinated efforts that promote producer responsibility and environmental stewardship. 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 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. Existing Conditions Background I Three purveyors distribute electricity to and within the Renton Planning Area: Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), Seattle City Light (SCL), and Puget Sound Power and Light Company (Puget Power). BPA is the regional administrative entity of the U.S. Department of Energy. Seattle City Light is a publicly owned utility serving Seattle and environs. Puget Power is a private, investor-owned utility, which serves nearly 800,000 customers in nine counties within the Puget Sound region. These three utilities are part of an integrated transmission grid, which 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 (unction 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 of the 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 hydro-electric projects and the Washington Public Power Supply System. Puget Power, 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 Power and, to a lesser extent, by Seattle City Light. For both utilities, the primary generation facilities are located outside their service areas. Puget Power 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc ; V-30 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT Existing Utility Service Area Puget Power is the principal provider of electrical service within the Renton city limits, as well as most of the remainder of the Renton Planning Area. Electricity is provided to the Bryn Mawr and Skyway portions· of the Renton Planning Area by SCL. By historical circumstance, Seattle also serves 10 customers within the Renton city limits. Currently, SCL and Puget Power are negotiating an agreement to transfer the facilities within the City of Renton to Puget Power. This action probably won't occur until late 1994 at the earliest. 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. Within the Planning Area, BPA operates transmission facilities, Seattle City Light operates transmission and distribution facilities, and Puget Power engages in all three functions. Figure 6-1 illustrates existing and proposed electrical substations and other transmission system facilities within the Planning Area. Bonneville Power Administration (BP A). Renton's geographic position offers a logical location for transmission routes. Five BPA transmission circuits follow the Rocky Reach-Maple Va11ey 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 BP A facilities north, south and east of Renton. Puget Power. As electrical service provider to most of the Planning Area, Puget Power 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 kVand 115 kV feed out from the Talbot Hill Station, which receives power from the adjacent BPA Maple Va11ey 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. A stand-by electrical generating plant is also located within the Planning Area. The Shuffleton generation facility is an oil-fired steam generating plant rated at 86 megawatts (MW) peak output. Historically, the facility has functioned as a back up to the primary hydro-based sources. Averaging 15 days of production per year, Shuffleton was last used in April 1991. H:\EDNSP\Cornp P\an\Amendments\GMA Update\E\ements & Vision\HEARING DRAFnHD-Utilities.doc V-31 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEMENT Seattle City Light. 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 Lightrights-of-way pass through the City and the Urban Growth Area. These circuits include: • the Bothell-Renton Right-of-Way (r-o-w), with one of two SCL 230 kV lines currently in use and leased to Puget Power. • the Renton-Creston R-O-W, with six 230 kV lines. • the Cedar Falls R-O-W, with one 115 kV line. Capacity/Reliability of Existing System Puget Power and Seattle City Light are both capable of meeting the current electrical load in their respective service areas. Puget Power 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 (see Reliability section, following). 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. Electric service interruptions are most frequently a product of extraordinary circumstances. Either an element of the system has been overtaxed by an unusual load 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 of the 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. Customer Connections Puget Power and Seattle City Light provide service within the Renton Planning Area to 39,456 residential customers and 3,752 commercial, industrial, and special customers. Forecasted Conditions -Electrical The total population for the Renton Planning Area (city plus annexation area) in 1990 was 101,593. The total 1990 employment for the Planning Area was 59,656 jobs. Forecasted increases in population would result in 135,161 persons and 91,874 jobs, within the Planning Area, by 2010. The net increases will be 33,568 in H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFN-lD-Utilities.doc V-33 Rev 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELl!.I~1ENT population and 32,218 in employment in the twenty-year time frame. Based on these forecasts the Renton Planning Area will have an additional load of 147.3 MY A, excluding industrial load increases, at the extreme winter peak in 2010. Industrial load additions will comprise some part of the 82.3 MV A increase that Puget Power 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 Puget Power have planned for upgrades and additions to their respective systems. I Puget Power. Puget Power 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, which is necessary to serve forecasted load growth for the next thirty years. Puget Power's plans for future transmission lines, facilities and upgrades will increase system capacity and reliability. Also proposed is the Aqua substation. This substation mayor 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. Seattle City Light. The existing 4 kV lines are being replaced with a new 26kV 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. Bonneville Power Administration. The agency 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 V AR 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 Power 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. Where 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. 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-9S. Encourage purveyors of electrical power to make facility improvements/additions within existing electric facility corridors where appropriate. Discussion: These policies promote the efficient delivery of electrical service to the community by regional purveyors while minimizing impacts to the community. . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFT\HD-Utilities.doc V-34 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELK IT Rev. 7115/02,Rev. 4/05/04 Natural Gas And Fuel Pipelines Objective U-I: Promote the safe transport and delivery of natural gas and other fuels within the Planning Area. 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 .25 to 2 psi. ill 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. ill 1991, the share of new homes that connected to natural gas lines within the Washington Natural Gas service area was about ninety-nine percent (99%). Natural Gas Utility Service Area Washington Natural Gas (WNG) is an investor-owned utility that builds, operates and maintains natural gas facilities serving the City of Renton Planning Area (City and designated Urban Growth Area). WNG's greater service area includes Snohomish, King, Pierce, Thurston and Lewis Counties. The company operates under a franchise ofthe Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission (WUTC), which certifies the WNG servIce area. General Location of Natural Gas Facilities Washington Natural Gas operates under a franchise agreement with the City of Renton, which allows WNG 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 WNG 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 located at Talbot Road and South 22nd Street (see Figure 7-1). WNG 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. WNG also operates an underground propane storage facility (Figure 7-1). The main components of the natural gas system are illustrated in Figure 7-2. Capacity of Natural Gas Facilities Washington Natural Gas Company records show that 4,842 customers were being served within Renton city limits as of June 1982. The number of customers has increased since then, and 7,020 customers were being served as of July 1993. Within the overall Planning Area, 20,731 customers are presently served by WNG. A portion of the Planning Area, west of the Renton Municipal Airport, and straddling S.R. 900 is currently not served by Washington Natural Gas (refer to Figure 7-1). Provision of natural gas service to this area would only require extension of intermediate service lines. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFliHD-Utilities.doc V-35 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES El ZNT Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 The capacity of the system is primarily constrained by the volume of gas entering the WNG 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. Currently, 79,000 cu~tomers are served by this gate station, only a portion of who are in the Renton Planning Area. ' 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 of the 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 ofWNG's delivery system may not always be sufficient to provide product to all customers during periods of exceptional demand. Therefore, WNG has several short term, load- balancing strategies. As stated previously, WNG 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 oflocalized press}lfe drops and increases system reliability. Forecasted Conditions Washington Natural Gas 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. WNG 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 scth. The backfeed from Covington will add another three million scth and, with the current peak hour feed of one million scth from Issaquah, there will be sufficient supply capacity t<;> serve the customer base anticipated for 2010. Proposed New or Improved Facilities Figure 7-1 shows the one proposed high pressure main required 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. WNG has a policy to expand the supply system to serve additional customers. Gas connections are initiated by customer requests. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Visjon\HEARlNG DRAFT\HD-Utilities.doc V-36 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EI. ~NT Rev. 7115/02,Rev. 4/05/04 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. 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 (Arc 0 ), 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 2319 Lind Avenue SW. Petroleum products enter Renton via two pipes from the City's northern border, and then extends 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. Figure 7-2 shows the pipelines within the Renton Planning Area as well as Olympic's Renton Station. 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. 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFliHD-Utilities.doc V-38 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL ZNT Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 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 Discussion: These policies support the development of a safe, efficient and comprehensive distribution system to provide natural gas and fuel products to meet the community's needs. 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. Telecommunications: Conventional Telephone, Fiber Optic Cables, Cellular Telephone, and Cable Television Existing Conditions -Conventional (Wireline) Telephone Utility Service Area -Conventional Telephone Service to Renton and its Planning Area is provided by Quest Communications, mc. Quest is an investor- owned corporation, whose holdings include companies serving regional, riational 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 LAT As are telephone exchange areas, which define the area in which US West is permitted to transport telecommunications traffic. There are 94 exchanges within Washington where Quest 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 "C~ntral Offices" (COs), switches 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. The CO serving Renton is located in a building on 3rd Avenue South within downtown Renton. Four main "feeder" cable routes generally extend from each CO, heading to the north, south, east and west (Figure 8-1). Connected to these main feeder routes are branch feeder routes. The branch feeder routes connect with thousands oflocalloops 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFIiHD-Utilities.doc V-40 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL .!.NT Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 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. As of 1990, US West provided service to 58,312 customers in Renton and the remainder of its identified Planning Area. 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 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 acconutlodate 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 of the 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. Growth is accommodated by llpgrading facilities and constructing new facilities. New technology is employed to enhance service, when available and practical. Enhancements necessary to maintain adequate capacity are determined through regular evaluation ofthe system. US West 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. A fiber optic cable is currently being reviewed by the City for permitting and construction, with service scheduled to begin in 1994. 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, then roughly parallels 1-405 until it intersects with 1-5. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFliHD-Utilities.doc V-42 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEI\ T Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 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 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 of the 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 which could be leased or purchased, 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 is 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 agricultural areas. In addition, the taller towers often are perceived to have more severe aesthetic imp.acts. 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). US West Cellular H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\E\ements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAFnHD-Utilities.doc V-43 · CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES EL :NT Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 (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 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. The increase in customers is expected to reach up to 20% of the State's population by 2010. US West NewVector reported a 45% rise in subscriptions in the Puget Sound area in 1993.' 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. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Eleme~ts & Vision\HEARlNG DRAF1\HD-Utilities.doc V-44 · CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES ELEl\ r Rev, 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 Fig. 8-2 H:\EONSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING ORAFI\HO-Utilities.doc V-45 CITY OF RENTON UTILITIES El };NT Rev. 7/15/02,Rev. 4/05/04 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 of the 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. Signal strength is maintained by amplifiers placed, at intervals along the cables. 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. Generally following street right-of-ways, 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 with 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 deqide 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 currerit terms of this franchise, the current purveyor would be required to provide cable service to projected growth within the City and the remainder of the Planning Area. Policy U-lOO. 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 101.1. 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-102. Encourage healthy competition, among telecommunication systems for provision of current and future telecommunication services. ' H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFl\HD-Uiilities.doc V-46 CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC; ELOPMENT ELEMENT <::f REVISED 8/20/04 VII. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT GOAL 1. Create and maintain a broad and stable economic base to sustain a high quality oflife for the Renton community. VJI-J ----------------~----------------------------------------------------- CITY OF RENTON ECONOMT REVISED 8/20/04 'EVELOPMENT ELEMENT Summary: Renton's economic development is important because it has a role in the timing, emphasis and extent in which the long-range goals ofthe city will occur. The economic development policies encourage collaborations between the public and private sectors to ensure the long-term economic health of Renton and its citizens. A healthy economy provides jobs and opportunity and helps pay for vital . public services such as education, parks, transportation, police and fire protection, and human services. The policies encourage a mix of industrial, retail, service and office uses that will result in a diversified employment base. The policies encourage the quality development necessary to sustain a high standard of living in Renton. (See the Residential and Centers Institutional Sections of the Land Use Element, the Capital Facilities Plan Element and the Downtown Elementfor policies related to this Economic Development Element.) General Objective and Policies Objective ED-A: Use public resources efficiently to leverage economic development. Policy ED-l. Fund infrastructure improvements in targeted areas to encourage development and redevelopment. Policy ED-2. Dedicate a portion of capital funds, identified through the Capital Facilities Plan, to encourage redevelopment, infill, land assembly and environmental remediation in targeted areas. Policy ED-3. Lands with adequate existing infrastructure should be given priority for development. Policy ED-4. Foster the development of and participate in public/private partnerships. Policy ED-5. Increase the diversity of employment opportunities within the City. Policy ED~5.1. Encourage economic' development and job creation to increase the household income of the City's population. Policy ED-6. Maintain uniform procedures and allocate sufficient resources to process development projects quickly and efficiently. Policy ED-7. Work with public schools, technical colleges, community colleges and other institutions of higher learning to foster a well-trained and educated work force. Objective ED-B: Expand the retail and office base within the City. Policy ED~8. Increase the retail sales tax base of the City. Policy ED-9. Adopt land use and zoning that is supportive of responsible economic development. Policy ED-lO. Identify strategies and incentives to attract new businesses to occupy existing office space within the City. Policy ED-H. Ensure an adequate amount of land is designated for retail/commercial uses based on site characteristics, market demand, community need, and adequacy of facilities and services. VIJ·2 Policy ED-l2. Create a tool box of incentives , to encourage retail development, for example, tax increment financing, marketing, etc. Policy ED-13. Create incentives to encourage office development, for example, tax increment financing, and marketing. Policy ED-l4. Evaluate the need for expansion of commercial land uses in the context of the City's desire to protect residential land uses. CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC I ELOPMENT ELEMENT REVISED 8/20/04 Objective ED-C: Sustain and expand the current industrial and manufacturing (heavy and light) employment base in the Employment Area Valley and Employment Area -Industrial designations. Policy ED-IS. Retain manufacturing and industrial jobs in the Employment Area-Valley and Employment Area-Industrial designations Policy ED-I5.I . Encourage high technology research and development jobs citywide. Policy ED-I5.2 Encourage light industrial jobs that contribute to the diversity of the Renton employment base and support other industries in the City. Policy ED-16. Work with private property owners and governmental agencies to remedy contaminated sites and prepare the sites for redevelopment. Policy ED-17. Work with industrial and manufacturing employers within the City to expand, redevelop and modernize their physical plants. Policy ED-17.!. Work with property owners to transition surplus industrial properties to their highest and best use. Objective ED-D: Provide incentives for Downtown Economic Development. Policy ED-18. Retain existing and attract new businesses that generate consumer oriented commercial activity. Policy ED-19. Aggressively market downtown as a place to live, shop and do business. (See Downtown Element Policies DT-59 through DT -62 for further policy direction). Policy ED-20. Achieve a reasonable balance . between parking supply and parking demand. Policy ED-21. Develop a downtown parking strategy that provides incentives for downtown business and retail development. [Editor'S Note: Two following policies were moved from Downtown Element and slightly modified for clarity. The objective that went with these policies seemed redundant to what is already here, and Policy DT-58 is proposedfor deletion as unnecessary. Please see Downtown Elementfor further details.} Policy ED-22. Regional commercial uses relocating to and within the downtown should be accommodated, when practical, in order to retain and add to those commercial uses. Policy ED-23. Business recruitment and retention efforts for the downtown should focus on those uses that can be integrated into the urban context of downtown. Objective ED-E: Contribute to a healthier regional economy. Policy ED-24. Influence local and regional economic development efforts. VU-3 O~S'l . , c,pt4ft:, 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT , O,c:'.r,o~ NOTE: TillS ELEMENT IS NEW TO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4US '. ~.v;:oZ.vfJ\lG . II~ 2& ;Do~ PARKS, RECREATION, OPEN SPACE AND TRAILS ELEME~V~D GOAL 1. Provide a high quality comprehensive park, recreation, open space, and trails system to meet the short-and long-term needs of current and future Renton residents. -1 - 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT Objective P-A: Provide park and recreational facilities throughout the City, maximizing public access to and involvement in a variety of leisure and cultural activities. Policy P-l: The parks system should include a variety of park types including neighborhood, community, regional, and linear parks; trails; open space; and special use areas to meet standards included in the Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan. Policy P-2: Parks, recreation, open space and trails facilities should be provided based on surveys of user demand and adopted standards. Policy P-3: Develop a variety of active and passive facilities in a coordinated system of neighborhood and community parks. Policy P-4: Equitably distribute parks and recreation by type throughout the City. Policy P-5: Provide geographically dispersed community centers to meet residents' needs for indoor recreation, athletic instruction, arts, meeting space, and special activities. Policy P-6: Maintain and develop underdeveloped public rights-of-way for public access and passive recreation where appropriate. Policy P-7: Connect parks, neighborhoods, schools, open space and activity areas together through a coordinated system of trails and open space. Policy P-S. Invest in park development in the following priority order. a.) Partially developed parkland b.) Undeveloped land in the park system c.) Park system expansion Consider the proximity of lands to population centers, growth trends, access, and land suitability. -3 Policy P-9: Areas of the Renton city limits and the P AA that are experiencing rapid growth, are underserved, or currently lacking recreational services should be prioritized for new investment. Policy P-IO: Obtain the land necessary to provide a broad range of recreational opportunities throughout the community to meet present and future needs. Policy P-ll: To help satisfy Level of Service (LOS) needs identified in the Long Range Park, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan, place a high priority of transferring King County parklands to the City of Renton upon annexation, when they are contiguous with the City boundary, or when a clear benefit to the citizens of Renton can be demonstrated. Establish King County's share of costs to bring parks up to acceptable standard. Policy P-12: Inform the public and promote parks and recreational activities by disseminating information from a variety of sources including: • Marketing brochures • City website • Electronic readerboard • Newsletters • Schools • Utility Billing • Renton Riches Policy P-13: Acquisition of parkland should occur far in advance of its actual need. Policy P-14: Place high priority upon purchasing as parkland, properties or easements for waterfront access. Policy P-15: Actively seek funding from a variety of sources to help implement a park acquisition and development program. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT Policy P-16: Develop a park endowment program to enable financial contributions. Policy P-17: Encourage private donations of properties where public access is anticipated or planned and where consistent . with the Long Range Park, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan. Policy P-18: Conversion of public parkland' to non-recreational use' should be . discouraged except when the following criteria are met: a.) Substitution of suitable land or facilities elsewhere of greater or equal value than the property sold can be accomplished, b.) Existing parcel size and considerations are not appropriate, or c.) Current location is inappropriate;-~ d.) No public purpose is served. Policy P-19: Land on water frontage should be discouraged from conversion. Policy P-20: Encourage Metro to provide public transportation to community and regional park facilities so that equal opportunity for involvement in park programs and facilities will be available to residents. Policy P-21: Develop and operate aquatic facilities. Policy P-22: Accessory commercial enterprise operations in parks should be subservient to the parks purpose, provide incidental services to park users and enhance the amenities of the park environment. Policy P-23: Major recreational facilities such as the Maplewood Golf Course may be developed as enterprise operations providing a self contained operation, significant specialized recreation amenities, retail and service components, cost covering user fees, and provide a significant public benefit. Policy P-24: Reinvest profits from enterprise funded recreational facilities into the expansion, maintenance, and operation of the facility. Objective P-B: Provide well-designed, constructed, maintained, and operated parklands and facilities in a manner that is responsive to the site and balances the needs of the community. Policy P-25: Prior to park development, budget adequate funding for staffing needs based on public usage of facilities. Policy P-26: Prior to park development, budget adequate funding for the long-term maintenance and operation in order to maintain asset safety, function, value and aesthetics. Policy P-27: Design and construct indoor and outdoor facility spaces including supporting spaces to be accessible to individuals and organizations with consideration given to physical capabilities, skill levels, age groups, income levels, and activity interests. -4 Policy P-28: Design and develop large capacity facilities utilizing high quality, durable materials that require low maintenance to minimize facility maintenance and operation costs. Policy P-29: Utilize low maintenance materials and other value engineering considerations that reduce care and security requirements, while retaining natural conditions. Policy P-30: Construction of new building facilities and retrofitting of existing buildings should consider the following elements: • Sustainable sites 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT • Water efficiency • Energy and atmosphere • Materials and resources • Environmental quality • Design excellence Policy P-31: Encourage the use oflow maintenance plant materials that provide year-round color and textural interest. Policy P-32: Implement the provisions and requirements of the American Disabilities Act (ADA) and other design and development standards that will improve park facility safety and security features for department personnel and the public. PolicyP-33: Develop, budget and implement safety standards, procedures and programs for department personnel that provide proper training and awareness. Policy P-34: Define and enforce rules and regulations concerning park activities and operations that will protect department personnel and the public. The City Attorney should be consulted regarding verbiage to be included in rules and regulations and on signage pertaining to safety. Policy P-35: Develop adopt-a-park programs, neighborhood park watches, park police patrols, and other innovative programs that will increase safety and security awareness and visibility. Policy P-36: Renovate parks and facilities in a manner that will provide safety and accessibility to all users, conserve the use of energy and other resources, and maximize efficient maintenance practices. Policy P-37: Monitor existing parks and facilities to ensure that acceptable standards for safety and performance are met. Policy P-3S: Establish funding to permit the orderly, on-going repair and rehabilitation of existing parks and facilities. Policy P-39: Conserve energy, water and other natural resources, and practice efficient and environmentally responsible maintenance and operation procedures. Policy P-40: Establish a maintenance management plan to the approved maintenance standards. Policy P-41: Steward the City's open space network to protect the City's natural character and sustain its urban forest resources. Policy P-42: All parks development should be undertaken in a way which considers the impact of traffic, noise, litter, glare, light, and hours of operation on adjacent areas. Objective P-C: Define implementation strategies and the Parks Recreation Open Space and Trails Policies through development of a long range functional plan. Policy P-43: Develop, adopt and implement a Long Range Park, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan to include the following elements (components): • Comprehensive inventory of existing facilities within the Renton City limits and the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) • Recreational Demand • Analysis of trends -5 List of recreation service providers in Renton Random household surveys and analysis • Public workshops/meetings • Park and facility needs assessment • LOS (Level of Service) standards/development criteria- develop LOS standards and periodic evaluation • Recommended service levels 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT • Natural resource element • Action plan/Capital facility plan (Implementation Plan) • Inventory of proposed facilities to accommodate population growth • Strategies for funding improvements Policy P-44: Periodically update Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan to maintain compliance with granting agencies. Policy P-45: Provide a Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan that is flexible and can respond to changes in user popUlation or recreational preference. Objective P-D: Conserve, enhance and create a variety of open space, wildlife, and natural resource areas. Policy P-51: Expand the open space network as population and employment densities increase. Policy P-52: Multiple uses of public open space should be provided. Interconnect the open space network. Include lands such as active and passive parks, schools, public open space, trails, private open spaces and native vegetation easements with public access easements, utility rights-of-way, waterways, and unusual open spaces (areas of protected habitat). Policy P-53: The function of the open space network should: • Protect land resources • Provide relief from urban development (air pollution, heat islands, noise, erosion crowding, flooding, etc.) • Maintain a habitat for wildlife • Provide physical access and visual connection within the City • Define the form of the City • Provide for educational opportunities • Provide a diversity of Natural Resources • Protect and encourage threatened and endangered species of plants and animals • Provide' public access to creeks, rivers, and lakes. Policy P-54: Where feasible, encourage public access into public open space areas Public use of open space should be provided -6 at a level that is suited to protecting the natural resources of the area. Policy P-55: Where feasible, encourage educational opportunities in public open space areas. Policy P-56: Structures should be minimized within public open space areas. Policy P-57: Develop inventories and management plans for open space and natural areas. Policy P-58: Provide funds for native vegetation and other habitat enhancements to encourage appropriate wildlife on existing open space lands where consistent with the recreational use of the area. Policy P-59: Acquire open space that has the following features: a. Can fill a gap or connect the existing open space network 'b. Is environm,entally sensitive or unique c. Provides wildlife habitat d. Can protect natural resource areas e. Is archeologically significant f. Provides relief from urban development Policy P-60: Increase public awareness of, and appreciation for, specific natural features through education and interpretive programs. , 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT Policy P-61: Incorporate utility, storm drainage, and other public lands into the open space system through cooperative use agreements. Objective P-E: Create a walkable community by developing and maintaining a comprehensive trails system that provides non-motorized access throughout the City, maximizes public access to parks, schools, and open space areas, connects to regional trail systems, and provides increased recreational opportunities for the public. Policy P-62: The trail system should serve local and regional users and be linked to the regional trail system. Policy P-63: Trails should provide for the needs of a diverse population of users including groups such as adults, children, seniors, workers, the disabled and other people engaging in either passive and/or active pursuits including: a. pedestrians, b. recreation bicyclists, c. joggers/runners, d. in-line skaters, e. bicycle commuters f. canoeists and kayakers, and g. hikers. Policy P-64: The trail system should be recognized and maintained by the City as distinct from informal or private pathways. Policy P-65: Informal or private pathways should form a secondary system with linkages to the public system. These trails should be developed and maintained under joint public/private partnership. Policy P-66: Linkages should be provided with surrounding communities within major regional corridors such as the Cedar River, Green River, the Lake Washington Loop, and the Soos Creek Trail. Policy P-67: Within the City, linkages should be provided among residential areas, employment areas, centers, and recreation areas. Policy P-68: Integrate Renton's recreational trail needs into a comprehensive -7 trail system serving both local and regional users. Policy P-69: Plan and coordinate appropriate pedestrian and bicycle commuter routes along existing minor arterial and collector arterial corridors. Policy P-70: Trails should be developed in tandem with motorized transportation systems, recognizing issues such as safety, user diversity, and experiential diversity. Policy P-71: Provide footlbicycle separation wherever possible; however, where conflict occurs, foot traffic should be given preference. (See Transportation Element.) Policy P-72: Provide adequate separation between non-motorized and motorized traffic to ensure safety. (See Transportation Element.) Policy P-73: Put major' emphasis on establishing a "macro" system of trails while identifying critical missing links in the existing functional system. Policy P-74: Address "micro" level trails and fill gaps in existing trail patterns where appropriate. The adopted Long Range Parks, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan shall be coordinated with and be an integral component of the City's on-going transportation planning activities. Policy P-75: As appropriate, encourage the use of existing utility corridors for trail purposes and secure trail easements. 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT Policy P-76: Furnish trail systems with appropriate trailhead supporting improvements that include interpretive and . directory signage, rest stops, drinking fountains, bicycle racks, landscaping, parking, loading areas, water, and other services. Policy P-77: Where appropriate, locate trailheads at or in conjunction with park sites, schools or other community facilities to increase local area access to the trail system and to reduce duplication of supporting improvements (e.g. parking). Policy P-78: Provide opportunities for the public to access the "Lakes to Locks" regional water trail system located on Lake Washington. Policy P-79: Design and develop trail improvements to a standard that is easy to maintain and easy to access by maintenance, . security and other appropriate personnel, equipment and vehicles. Policy P-80: Ensure development adjacent to trails is designed to minimize impacts to and enhance trails. Policy P-81: Trail routes on private lands are not classified as official trails until the City has legal use authority. Policy P-82: Trail alignments should take into account soil conditions, slope, surface drainage and other physical limitations that could increase construction and/or maintenance costs. Policy P-83: Whenever possible, recreation trails should not be part of a street roadway. Policy P-84: Trails should be looped and interconnected to provide a variety of trail lengths and destinations. Policy P-85: The functions of railroad and utility right-of-ways should be assessed. Abandoned utility and/or railroad right-of- ways should receive high priority for designation and acquisition of trail and/or corridors. Policy P-86: Incorporate utility, storm drainage, and other public lands into the trail system through cooperative use agreements. Policy P-87: Develop and maintain comprehensive trails systems which provide non-motorized access throughout the City, maximizes public access to open space areas, and provides increased recreational opportunities for the public. (See Transportation Element Objective T-K.) Objective P-F: Provide opportunities for public participation in recreational services and programs that are creative, stimulating, educational, proactive and healthy and reflect the needs and interests ofthe community. Policy P-88: Provide recreational activities specific and appropriate for each age group. Policy P-89: Provide outdoor space for community and civic events, public gatherings, programmed activities and entertainment. Policy P-90: Develop a balanced system of recreational opportunities that is diverse, comprehensive, and enriching to a variety age groups and abilities. , -8 Policy P-91: City of Renton residents should be given priority or preference in registering for recreational programs and use of park facilities. Policy P-92: Non-resident fees should be considered to help offset City expenses for park and recreational services and facilities. Policy P-93: Make park facilities and recreational programs available to non- '- I 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKs ELEMENT residents where this will not restrict or will enhance enjoyment of recreation opportunities for City of Renton residents. Policy P-94: Encourage and promote a comprehensive, diverse and enriching public art program throughout the City, including the display of a variety of artwork in public places and buildings. Policy P-9S: Provide a balance of recreational facilities for competitive skill levels and income groups. Policy P-96: Work with the arts community to utilize local resources and talents to increase public awareness of artwork and programs. Policy P-97: Support successful collaborations among the Municipal Arts Commission, business community, service groups, schools, arts patrons, and artists to utilize artistic resources and talents to the optimum degree possible. Policy P-98: Aquatic facilities should provide recreational and instructional uses that are available to a variety of age groups and abilities. Policy P-99: Encourage the development, maintenance, and operation of a variety of year-round, multi-use indoor facilities, including but not limited to teen centers, senior centers, and activity, neighborhood and community centers to meet differing age and skill levels, and community interests and needs. Policy P-IOO: Provide special indoor and outdoor cultural and performing arts that enhance and expand music, drama, dance, visual arts and other audience and participatory opportunities. Policy P-I01: Provide indoor space to accommodate arts and crafts, music, video, classroom instruction, day care, latch key, physical conditioning, gymnasiums, recreational courts, eating and healthcare, and meeting facilities. Policy P-I02: Provide arts and crafts; classroom instruction in music, dance and arts; physical conditioning and healthcare; day care; latch key and other program activities. Policy P-I03: Provide soccer, baseball, softball, basketball, volleyball, tennis, and other instruction and participatory programs for a variety of age groups. Policy P-I04: Provide nature interpretation programs to increase awareness, understanding and appreciation of Renton's wildlife and natural resource areas. Policy P-:IOS: Provide geographically dispersed recreation opportunities, using City-owned facilities, school district facilities and other non-profit agency facilities. Objective P-G: Develop and expand public and private partnerships to maximize recreational opportunities. Policy P-I06: Develop partnerships with school districts and·non-profit agencies to provide indoor recreation, athletic instruction, arts, cultural activities and facilities, meeting space, active outdoor recreation and special activities. Policy P-I07: Work closely with school districts focusing on school areas with -9 attendance in the City and P AA to make optimum use of school district facilities for recreation, to provide effective recreational programs and to develop and maintain joint- use facilities for the mutual benefit·ofthe City and the participating district. Policy P-I08: Partner with non-profit agencies King County, the State of ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON PARKS ELEMENT Washington, the Federal government arid other public and private service providers to meet the cultural, recreational, social, and environmental programs and space needs of the City. Policy P-I09: Partner with neighboring cities in planning for sub-regional park facilities. Policy P-llO: Partner with neighboring cities in land acquisition, design, development, and maintenance costs for ' sub-regional park and recreation facilities· where there is a need identified in the Long- Range Park, Recreation, Open Space and Trails Plan. Policy P-lll: Coordinate with the school districts, non-profit agencies, and other jurisdictions on short and long range park/recreational facilities planning, acquisition, development, and facility utilization. -10 Policy P-ll~: Where appropriate, formalize partnerships through joint-use agreements. Policy P-1l3: Coordinate volunteer efforts with businesses, non-profit organizations, and community organizations. Policy P-1l4: Continue as the primary coordinating agency between the City and the state, county and school district for recreation. Policy P-1l5: Coordinate with other governmental agencies and private organizations to provide a connected open space system for the City and surrounding region ,. ,. Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT VIII. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT GOAL 1. Continue protection of Renton's natural systems, natural beauty, and environmental quality. 2. Provide protection to endangered species inhabiting and passing through the City limits while continuing to provide a competitive economic development environment. 3. Manage Shorelines of the State to protect unique and fragile areas, retain and enhance natural amenities within an urban environment, and minimize hazards to public safety. [Editor's Note: Shaded items are proposed for amendment as a result of review by the Best Available Science review process in 2003/4. Other amendments were by the City's ESA Task Force and were reviewed previously by the Planning Commission and City Council in 2002.] H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Eiements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Environmental.doc VIII-J < Amended 8-20-04 " - CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS . ',' Page General Objective And Policies ..... ,., ......................................................................................... Vill-3 Surface Water ........................................................... : ................................................................ Vill-3 Rivers And Streams ................................................................................................................... VITI-4 Wetlands .... ~ ............................................................................................................................... Vill-4 Flood Plains ............................................................................................................................... Vill-5 Stormwater .................................................................................................................................. VITI-6 Groundwater Resources .................................... ; ........................................................................ VITI-7 Fisheries And Wildlife Resources ............................................................................................. Vill-8 Adaptive Management ................................................................................................................ Vill-8 Air Quality ...................................................... ; ............................. : ............................................. Vill-9 Noise Impacts ............................................................................. ; ........................................... Vill-lO Steep Slopes, Landslide, And Erosion Hazards ................................... : ..................................... Vill-lO Seismic Areas ....................................................................................... ' ...................................... Vill-ll Coal Mine Hazards .................................................................................................................... Vill-l1 Shorelines of the State: Natural Resources and Hazard Management ...................................... Vill-l1 H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFN-ID-Environmental.doc VIII-2 Amended 8-20-04 ,j CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Summary: The purpose of the environmental policies is to provide the policy background and basis for future environmental actions by the City of Renton as it attempts to balance urbanization, economic development, and natural area protection. Environmental policies address substantive issues such as development within floodplains, wetlands, and steep slopes and procedural issues such as how these areas should be mapped and how they should be regulated. Environmental policies will be implemented through economic development decisions, critical areas regulations, and incentives for environmental protection. (See the Employment Area - Industrial and Open Space Sections of the Land Use Element, Stormwater Section of the Capital Facilities Plan Element, Storm water & Aquifer Protection Sections of the Utilities Element for policies related to Environmental Element.) General Objective and PoliCies Objective EN-A: Protect, restore and enhance environmental quality through land use plans and patterns, surface water management programs, park master programs, development reviews, incentive programs and work with citizens, land owners, and public and private agencies. Policy EN-l. Prevent development on lands where development would create hazards to life, property, or environmental quality. Policy EN-2. Ensure that development on lands supporting endangered or threatened species occurs in a way that maintains adequate habitat. Policy EN-3. Use the best available science to determine critical area buffers and maintain Surface Water achievable ecological functions ofthose buffers. Buffers should be protected per Policy U-85, Utilities Element, Surface Water policies; Policy EN-4. Implement clustered development as a method of conserving additional private opens space,orproviding public parks and trails. Objective EN-B: Protect and enhance quality of City's surface water resources for public health and safety, as well as recreation and environmental preservation. Policy EN-5. Manage water resources for multiple uses including recreation, fish and wildlife habitat, flood protection, erosion control, water supply, energy production, and open space. Policy EN-6. Minimize erosion and sedimentation by requiring appropriate construction techniques and land stewardship practices. Policy EN-7. Limit discharges of pollutants such as chemicals, insecticides, pesticides, and other hazardous wastes to surface waters. Policy EN-8. Encourage methods of reducing effective impervious surface and surface water run- off, in areas where limiting impervious surfaces will decrease the cost of constructed surface water detention facilities such that the net cost of the project is not unreasonably increased. [Editor's Note: Idea is to provide incentives and regulations to minimize impervious surfaces, but to recognize a balance of effectiveness and cost.] Discussion: High water quality can be achieved through the use of Best Management Practices for industries, businesses, and public education. Preservation of riparian corridors can protect receiving waters from storm water effects such as erosion and sedimentation. Further protection of surface water will come through aquifer protection policies and ordinances, which could limit discharges of pollutants. Land uses are suggested in the plan, which will also secondarily address surface water impacts. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFI\HD-Environmental.doc VIII-3 c Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Rivers and Streams Objective EN-C: Protect and enhance the City's rivers, major and minor creeks and intermittent stream courses. [Editor's Note: The following provide a policy basis for the direction we are heading with water resource management and buffer areas. They also anticipate the "no-net-Ioss" provision from Draft State DOE Shoreline guidelines and State Office of Community Development Draft Model Critical Areas Ordinance.] Policy EN-9. Streams and lakes in the City and in annexation proposals should be classified based on water body functions, habitat quality, and documented presence of fish or suitable fish habitat, particularly Federal or State protected species. Policy EN-IO. Stream and lake classifications and regulations should recognize the variable natural and built environment character of the segments, such as through variations in management or buffer zones and development standards. Policy EN-H. Stream and lake regulations and programs should strive for no-net-Ioss of existing riparian functions along City waters. Mitigation priorities such as impact avoidance, impact minimization, and compensation for impacts, should be established in the regulations. Policy EN-12. Through a Citywide programmatic review, and/or by establishing development environmental review criteria, analyze the cumulative impact of development upon City waterbodies. Mitigation programs, including on- site or off-site measures, should be developed to address cumulative impacts. Wetlands Policy EN-13. Degraded channels and banks should be rehabilitated by public programs and new development. Policy EN-14. Vegetated buffers along all waterways and intermittent stream courses are intended to provide for combinations of infiltration, maintenance of wildlife habitat and normal water temperatures, filtration, large woody debris, natural organic nutrients, bank stability, and the retardation of run-off and erosion. [Editor's Note: Not all functions are likely to be present, but different combinations may be.] Policy EN-IS. In situations where it is necessary to cross or access fish-bearing rivers and/or stream channels, bridges or above-water crossings should be given first priority. When above-water crossings and bridges are not feasible, culverts should be used which are oversized and have gravel bottoms which maintain the channel's width and grade, allowing fish access to critical habitat. State requirements for new culvert crossings should be consulted. Discussion: The rivers and streams within the City hold great importance for the citizens. These waterways can be protected through three measures: preservation of their courses, their banks, and the vegetation next to them. Waterways can also be protected through incentive programs to encourage restoration. [Editor's Note: Based on discussions with A. Kindig, the City does not have "pristine" areas in the City limits.} Objective EN-D: Preserve and protect wetlands for overall biological system functioning, including flood storage, wildlife habitat, water quality protection, water quantity or infiltration, aesthetic relief, erosion and sedimentation control, and pollutant removal. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFI\HD-Environmental.doc VIII-4 s Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Policy EN-16. Achieve no overall net loss of the City's remaining wetlands base. Policy EN-17. Wetland buffers should facilitate infiltration and provide for the biological regime, reduce amount and velocity of run-off, and provide for wildlife habitat. [Editor'S Note: Per discussi.ons with consultant team, wetlands do not maintain stable water temperatures and actually warm it quite a bit.] Policy EN-18. Water level fluctuations in wetlands used as part of stormwater detention systems should be similar to the fluctuations under natural conditions. The utilization, maintenance, and storage capacity provided in existing wetlands should be encouraged. Policy EN-19. When development may impact wetlands, the following hierarchy should be followed in deciding the appropriate course of action: a. avoid impacts to the wetland, b. minimize impacts to the wetland, c. restore the wetland when impacted, d. recreate the wetland at a ratio which will provide for its assured viability and success, e. enhance the functional values of an existing degraded wetland. Flood Plains Policy EN-20. Wetland protection measures should reflect their acreage and quality. High- quality wetlands should have more protection. Policy EN-21. Support incentives for an overall net gain of wetland functions and values of new development including, buffer-width averaging, and wetland enhancement projects associated with new development projects. Policy EN-22. Encourage public access to wetlands for use when sensitive habitats are protected. Policy EN-23. Meet water quality standards prior to discharging surface water into wetlands. Policy EN~24. Ensure wetland mitigation projects in the City attainthe same ecological functions as natural wetlands of equivalent quality. Objective EN-E: Protect the natural functions of 100 year floodplains and floodways .. Policy EN-25. Prohibit permanent structures from developing in floodways due to risks associated with deep and fast flowing water. Policy EN-26. Limit development within the 100 year floodplain to that which is not harmed by flooding. Roads and finished floors of structures should be located above the 100-year flood level, and new development should provide compensation for existing flood storage capacity due to filling. Policy EN-27. Restrict land uses to those, which do not cause backwater or significantly increase the velocity of floodwaters. Policy EN-28. Incorporate design features, which are intended to keep harmful substances from flood waters in any development which is allowed in the 100 year floodplain. Policy EN-29. Emphasize non-structural methods in planning for flood prevention and damages reduction. Substantial stream channel H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFnHD-Environmental.doc VIII-S Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT modification, realignment, and straightening should be discouraged as means of flood protection. Policy EN-30. Dredging activities may be conducted as follows: a; Continue as-needed maintenance dredging of the constructed channel section of the Lower Cedar River per the City of Renton's agreement with the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers for flood control using best management practices to minimize salmonid habitat disruption. b. In coordination with Federal or State permitting agencies, the City may allow dredging outside of the lower Cedar River for public purposes such as to protect public facilities, or when needed to improve aquatic habitat, for example to correct problems of material distribution or water quality when such problems adversely affect aquatic life. [Editor'S Note: The City maintains several public facilities that require periodic dredging of associated water bodies, but such activities require other agency oversight.] [Editor'S Note: The following policies are added to address flooding as a regional issue, and to reference conservation as a means of flood protection responding to Objective EN-E.] Policy EN-31 Renton's floodplain land use and management activities should be carried out in Stormwater coordination with King County, adjacent cities, and State and Federal agencies. The City should partner with agencies to implement regional plans such as the King County Flood Hazard Reduction Plan. Policy EN-32 The existing flood storage and conveyance functions and ecological values of floodplains; wetlands, and riparian corridors should be protected, and should, where possible, be enhanced or restored. [Editor's Note: Suggest Retention of following , discussion to clarify to outside reviewers like NMFS, policy on Cedar River dredging] Discussion: The maintenance dredging of the· lower 1.25 miles of the constructed channel section of the Lower Cedar River will continue to be needed periodically. The City of Renton was the local project sponsor with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineersfor the construction of the Cedar River Section 205 Flood Hazard Reduction Project. As the local project sponsor, the City of Renton is required by its Project Cooperation Agreement with the US Corps of Engineers to maintain the federal project, which includes future maint'enance dredging. Objective EN-F: Stormwater management programs should optimiie Renton's water resources. Policy EN-33. Maintain and enhance natural drainage systems to protect water quality and habitat, reduce public costs, and prevent environmental degradation. Policy EN-34. Preserve natural surface water storage sites that help regulate surface flows and recharge groundwater. Policy EN-3S. Provide local funding for the stormwater program through Storm Water Utility. Policy EN-36. Control quantity and quality of stormwater run-off from all new development to be consistent with natural conditions. Policy EN-36. Minimize on-site erosion and sedimentation during and after construction. Policy EN-37. Route stormwater run-off from new development to avoid gully erosion or landslides in ravines and steep hillsides. H:\EDNSP\Comp Pian\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRArnHD-Environmental.doc VIII-6 & \: & i Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Policy EN-38. Industries and businesses should use best management practices to prevent erosion and sedimentation and to prevent pollutants from entering ground or surface waters. Policy EN-37. Implement surface water management systems, which protect natural features whenever feasible. Policy EN-38. Promote means of flow control to prevent erosion, protect water quality and salmonid habitat, and maintain the channel in as natural a state as possible. Policy EN-39. Use, maintain, and enhance the natural stormwater storage capacity provided in existing significant wetlands. Policy EN-40. Use interlocal agreements and cooperative planning programs to coordinate, where appropriate, with King County, Tukwila, Newcastle, and Kent and other agencies for stormwater management. Policy EN-41 .. Actively participate in non-point source pollution watershed plans including those for the May Creek, Cedar River, and Green River Basins. Objective EN-G: In conjunction with natural system protection policies, storm and surface water control and drainage systems should prevent threats to life, property and public safety during a IOO-year flooding event. Policy EN-42. Promote the return of precipitation to the soil at natural rates near where it falls through the use of detention ponds, grassy swales, and infiltration where feasible. Policy EN-43. Promote development design, which minimizes impermeable surface coverage by limiting site coverage and maximizing the exposure of natural surfaces. Policy EN-44. Manage the cumulative effects of stormwater through a combination of engineering and preservation of natural systems. Objective EN-H: Support and sustain educational, informational, and public involvement programs in the City over the long term in order to encourage effective use, preservation, and protection of Renton's water resources. Policy EN-45. Provide information for and participate in informing and educating individuals, groups, businesses, industry, and government in the protection and enhancement of the quality and quantity of the City's water resources. Policy EN-46. Increase the community's understanding of the City's ecosystem and the relationship of the ecosystem to water resources. Groundwater Resources Policy EN-47. Create the long-term community commitment that will be necessary to sustain efforts to protect the City's water resources, and habitat, as well as maintain and improve water quality through educational programs. Policy EN-48. Continue to participate in and implement the recommendations from the Water Resource Inventory Area (WRJA) regional salmon conservation planning in response to the Endangered Species Act. Objective EN-I: Ensure the long-term protection of the quality and quantity of the groundwater resources of the City of Renton in order to maintain a safe and adequate potable water supply for the City. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAFN-lD-Environmental.doc VIII-7 Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Policy EN-49. Designate and protect areas of critical recharge and other associated aquifers within the City and its Potential Annexation Area through coordination with surrounding jurisdic- tions. Policy EN-50. Emphasize the use of open ponding and detention, grassy swales, clean roof run-off, and other stormwater management techniques that maximize water quality and infiltration where appropriate and which will not endanger groundwater quality. Policy EN-51. Allow dual use of sensitive lands such as wetlands and flood plains as parks and greenbelts where feasible. Policy EN-52. Any businesses relocating to the downtown that use or store materials regulated by the Aquifer Protection Ordinance should be sited outside of Zone 1 of the aquifer. Policy EN-53. Avoid contamination of aquifer during construction activities. Objective EN-J: Increase the participation by the City of Renton in resolution of regional ecological issues that may impact aquifer protection. Policy EN-54. Promote the use of interlocal agreements with other agencies to restrict land use in sensitive aquifer recharge areas to minimize possible sources of pollution and the potential for erosion, and to increase infiltration. Fisheries and Wildlife Resources [Ed. Note: See new Policy EN-53for avoiding contamination of aquifer by construction] .. Policy EN-55. Participate in land use and sewerage decisions in outlying areas of the City's aquifer. Objective EN-K: Identify, protect, and enhance wildlife habitat throughout the City. Policy EN-56. Identify unique and significant wildlife habitat and ensure that buildings, roads, and other features are located on less sensitive portions of sites containing identified habitat. Policy EN-57. Encourage preservation and enlargement of existing habitat areas through development incentives. . Policy EN-58. Improve fish habitat within City of Renton water bodies through stream and water quality protection and select habitat restoration projects where degraded conditions negatively Adaptive Management influence salmonid survival. [Editor'S Note: Suggested by consultant C. Hadley, Cedarock for more clarity.] Policy EN-59. Retain and enhance aquatic and riparian habitats by requiring vegetated buffers for all new development along waterway corridors. Buffers should be protected per Policy U-85, Utilities Element, Surface Water policies . Objective EN-L: Environmentally sensitive areas should be identified and regulated to protect life and property according to the severity of the natural hazards. Critical area regulations should be reviewed periodically to ensure effectiveness in protecting environmentally sensitive areas. H:\EDNSP\Comp Pian\Amendments\GMA Update\Eiements & Vision\HEARING DRAFMD-Environmental.doc VIII-8 & .---- Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Policy EN-60. The following should be considered in designating and controlling environmentally sensitive sites: a. critical areas inventory; b. steep slopes drainage swales, lakes, wetiands, bogs, streams, rivers, or other surface water bodies; . c. unstable or water-bearing soils; d. presence of Federal, State or locally identified endangered or threatened species; and e. aquifer recharge areas. Policy EN-61. Maintain an up-to-date inventory of environmentally sensitive areas including descriptions of criteria for designation andmaps. The inventory of environmentally critical areas should be reviewed and updated regularly based upon changing conditions or new information. [Editor's Note: Combined with EN-68.] Policy EN-62. Regulate identified sensitive areas through the implementation of regulations addressing uses, densities, clearing, grading, and/or vegetation removal and retention. Policy EN-63. Designate setbacks around environmentally critical areas to protect both the areas and the users. [Editor's Note: Use term that is defined.] Policy EN-64. Native Growth Protection Easements or equivalent protective measures shall be used to protect critical areas and critical area buffers that are not protected through public ownership. [Editor's Note: Easements may not be only method/instrument.] Policy EN-6S. Encourage preservation of these natural resource lands and critical areas through in- centives and regulations, which will provide for public health and safety, and provide visual relief Air Quality from urban structures and development. [Editor's Note: Secondary corridors language removed in policy above; language added in Policy EN-65 to clarify.] Policy EN-66. Where appropriate combine all critical areas and natural resource areas with recre- ational facilities to provide public access and trail linkages through community separators. [Editor'S Note: Language intended to utilize terms defined in plan glossary.] Policy EN-67. The fmal identification of environmentally critical areas, hazardous sites or portions of sites should be established during the review of project proposals. [Editor'S Note: Use defined term.] Policy EN-68. RESERVED •. Policy EN-69. Critical areas, or portions of critical areas, may be included in community separators. Policy EN-69.1. Critical area buffer zone should be identified during permit review processes and protected during construction. (to be moved) Policy EN-69.2. Fences and signage as appropriate should be installed at the time of development to protect critical areas and their buffers. (to be moved) Policy EN-69.3. Buffer zone protection post- development should be the responsibility of homeowner's associates and property owners. (to be moved) Policy EN-69.4. The City should provide education opportunities to encourage long-term protection of critical area buffer zones. Objective EN-M: Protect and promote clean air to ensure a healthy environment. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARlNG DRAF1\HD-Environmental.doc VlII-9 -- ~--------------------------------~--~ .... Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Policy EN-70. Maintain high air quality standards through efficient land use patterns. Noise Impacts Policy EN-71. Promote air quality through reduction in emissions from industry, traffic, commercial, and residential uses. Objective EN-N: Minimize individual and cumulative noise impacts to promote health by reducing ambient, noise levels where possible to reduce annoy~nce and promote a pleasant and quality environment. Policy EN-n. Buffer noise impacts from construction activities to residential neighborhoods and commercial areas. Policy EN-73. Limit the use of public address systems to ensure that noise does not spill over to adjacent land uses and activities on a daily basis. Steep Slopes, Landslide, and Erosion Hazards Policy EN-74. Ensure that the design, placement, and use of anyon-site equipment, such as air ' conditioning units or other equipment is accom- plished in a manner which minimizes noise impacts on adjacent land uses and activities. Objective EN-O: Steep slopes, landslide hazards, and erosion hazards should be protected and retain natural vegetation as much as possible in order to protect the public from landslide and property erosion, as well as to provide wildlife habitat. [Editor'S Note: Steep slopes are protected above a certain percent in regulations, but not all steep slopes that are protected are considered landslide hazards.] Policy EN-7S. Land uses on steep slopes should be designed to prevent property damage and environmental degradation, and to enhance greenbelt and wildlife habitat values by preserving and enhancing existing vegetation to the maximum extent possible. Policy EN-76. Allow land alteration only for . approved development proposals or approved mitigation efforts that will not create unnecessary erosion, undermine the support of nearby land, or scar the landscape, Policy EN-77. Mitigate problems of drainage, erosion, siltation, and landslides by decreasing development intensity, site coverage, and vegetation removal as slope increases. Policy EN-7S. Protect high landslide areas from land use development and roads. Policy EN-79. Retain or replace native ground cover after construction in areas subject to erosion hazards. Special construction practices, should be used, and allowable site coverage may need to be reduced to prevent erosion and sedimentation. Limitations on the time when site work can be done may also be appropriate. Policy EN-SO. mcorporate design elements which preserve and enhance the natural drainage system into developments in an effort to control erosion and sedimentation. Policy EN-S1. Design, locate, anq' construct utility systems in a manner, which will preserve the integrity of the existing land forms, drainage ways, and natural systems. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\E\ements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Environmental.doc VIII-tO .---- I Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT Seismic Areas Objective EN-P: Reduce the potential for damage to life and property due to seismic events. Policy EN-82. Minimize the risk of structural damage, fire, and injury to occupants, and prevent post-seismic collapse by using special building design and construction measures in areas with high seismic hazards. Coal Mine Hazards Policy EN-83. Prior to development in high seismic hazard areas, builders should conduct special studies to evaluate seismic risks and should use appropriate measures to reduce the risks. Objective EN-Q: Reduce the potential for damage to life and property due to collapsed mine shafts, improperly sealed mining tunnels, and methane gas leaks associated with abandoned coal mines, and return these properties to productive uses. Policy EN-84. Maintain maps of areas, which may be impacted by abandoned coal mines and update these maps as new information becomes available. Policy EN-85. Allow clustered developments in coal mine hazard areas in order to concentrate development away from coal mine hazards that may not be precisely located and mapped. Policy EN-86. Show the location of coal mine hazards on any plat or site plan maps. Such documents should be recorded. Shorelines of the State: Natural Resources and Hazard Management Summary: Approximately 18 miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act (SMA) of 1971, including Lake Washington, Green River, Cedar River, Black River, Springbrook Creek, and May Creek are shorelines within the City. Generally, regulated shorelines include the water bodies and their shore lands extending landward from the floodway or ordinary high water mark for two hundred (200) feet in all directions. This jurisdictional area increases to include all marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with the regulated Shorelines of the State. The total of this area is subject to shoreline use classification and regulation. Natural environment conservation and flood hazard minimization are priorities of the SMA and of the Renton's required Shoreline Master Program, of which the policies of this sub-element are a part. (Also refer to the Land Use Element, Shorelines of the State: Land Use, Recreation, and Circulation Management.) . Objective EN-R: Protect and preserve resources and amenities of all Shorelines of the State situated in the City of Renton for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. [Editor's Note: RSMP 4.02.01.] Policy EN-88 Existing natural resources should be conserved. 1. Water quality and water flow should be maintained at a level to permit recreational use, to provide suitable habitat for aquatic life, and to satisfy other required human needs. 2. Aquatic habitats and spawning grounds should be protected, improved and, if feasible, restored. [Editor'S note: Final word changed from "increased" to "restored". Unlikely to increase, but may be able to restore lost habitat.] H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRArnHD-Environmental.doc VIII-II --------------------------------~ .... Amended 8-20-04 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT 3. Terrestrial wildlife habitats, including· wetlands, riparian areas, and upland habitats should be protected, improved and, if feasible, increased. [Editor's Note: "Terrestrial" added to beginning to distinguish between aquatic habitat in #2.] 4. Unique natural and fragile areas should be designated and maintained as open space. Passive recreation access and use should be restricted, if necessary, for the conservation of these areas. [Editor's Note: From RSMP 4.02.02.A; subsection 1 amended to say "suitable habitat for aquatic life" rather than "suitable habitat for desirable forms of aquatic life."; subsection 4 amended to indicate "unique and fragile areas should be designated and maintained as open space" rather than "unique natural areas should be designated and maintained as open space for passive recreation." Unique and fragile phrase is defined in Renton SMP.] Policy EN-89 Shoreline land uses including residential, commercial, industrial, civic, and mixed uses should be allowed consistent with the Land Use Element. Existing and future activities on all shorelines of the State regulated by the City of Renton should be designed to minimize adverse effects on the environment. [Editor'S Note: RSMP 4.02.02.B. First sentence responds to Planning Commission comments to ensure land use vision can be achieved, February 2004.] Policy EN-90 The City of Renton should take aggressive action with responsible governmental agencies to assure that discharges from all drainage basins are considered an integral part of shoreline planning. 1. Soil erosion and sedimentation, which . adversely affect any shoreline within the City of Renton should be prevented or controlled. 2. The contamination of existing water . courses should be prevented or controlled. [Editor'S Note: RSMP 4.02.02.C.] . . ~ " Policy EN-91 All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of F AI-405 right-of- way, and that portion of Springbrook Creek beginning from approximately SW 27th Street on the north to SW 31st Street on the south, abutting City-owned wetlands in this area, and for that portion of the west side of the Creek in the vicinity of SW 38th Street abutting the City's recently acquired Wetlands Mitigation Bank should be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. 1. Low density development should be .. encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the shoreline. 2. For the subject locations, the waterways should be left in an undeveloped natural state as much as possible. [Editor'S note: From RSMP 4.02.02.F; Subsection 2 shortened to remove the repeat of the specific location since it is in the preamble of the policy.] Policy EN-92. Floodplain objective EN-E and associated policies are incorporated by reference as part of the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program objectives and policies. [Editor'S Note: Rather than repeat flood plain policies here to fulfill flood hazard minimization policy requirements, amendments are made to add a couple of policies under Objective EN-E to an already strong policy section and incorporate the policies by reference as part of the ~horeline Master Program.] H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Elements & Vision\HEARING DRAF1\HD-Environmental.doc VIli-12 / OEVELOPMoEFNTRE';}f't~I_NG -CITY AUG 2 6 2004 R!«&tviD:ON 2003-M-02 (LUA..,Ol-167) LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE DESIGNATION FROM CENTER INSTITUTION TO CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL AND TO REZONE FROM LIGHT INDUSTRIAL TO COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL OWNER: KING COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH DEPARTMENT APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON DESCRIPTION The proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan designation of a parcel from Center Institution (CI) with Light Industrial (lL) zoning to Corridor Commercial (CC) with Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning. The property is located south ofNE 4th Street, west of Monroe Avenue NE. The total parcel size is 4.73 acres. ISSUE SUMMARY This application is for a designation that would allow a mix of uses, including institutional (county facilities and a potential partnership with Renton Technical College), commercial (retail and office), and high-density residential, to facilitate redevelopment of the site. The property is currently the location ofthe King County Public Health facility for the Southeast District. The building is too small for current department needs. There is a possibility that the Dental Services facility could be relocated from its present location in Downtown Renton and be co-located with Public Health in a new structure. Several social service entities and the Renton Technical College have discussed, with the Public Health department, the possibility of locating operations at this site. In addition, a private developer for residential use may be invited to participate in the project. At this time, discussion of a potential project is preliminary however, so maximum flexibility is desired by the property owner. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY Redesignation to Corridor Commercial with Commercial Arterial zoning is recommended. BACKGROUND The Site The 4.73 acre property, at 3001 NE 4th Street, was annexed into the City of Renton in 1966. The land use designation is Center Institution. It is zoned Light Industrial with a 'P' suffix (public notification required for change of use). There is an existing, II,OOO-square foot building on the site that is too small for the King County Public Health Department needs and structurally unsound in terms of potential seismic factors. The King County park - Map Amendment #2003-M-02 Page 2 of5 Staff Recommendation 07/30/04 maintenance shops are located to the south of the health facility on a 17.2-acre parcel. King' County intends to redevelop the Shops property for a new regional communications and emergency coordination center. The Surrounding Area Existing land use in the surrounding area is m~1ti-family residential to the north and commercial to the east. Office buildings and a self-service storage facility are under construction to the west. The land use designations are Employment Area-Commercial to the north (being redesignated through citywide Comprehensive Plan amendments in 2004 to Corridor Commercial), Employment Area-Commercial (Corridor Commercial) and Residential Options to the east, Employment Area -Industrial to the west, and Center Institution (a designation that is also becoming Corridor Commercial) to the south. The current zoning is Commercial Arterial (CA) to the north, CA and Residential lO (R-lO) to the east, Light Industrial (IL) and Residential Multi-family-Infill (RM-I) to the west, and IL to the south. Environmental Conditions The area in the vicinity of the site has a history of commercial gravel extraction and use as a landfill. A gravel pit was excavated to an approximate depth of 60 feet below the existing grade. It is known to have been located to the west, but its limits in relation to the King County property, are unknown. The excavation was subsequently backfilled with both a relatively small amount of demolition waste, including ash and waste material from World War II housing projects, and clean fill material. Some material deposited on site consisted of "uncontrolled fill." There are no records of waste disposal practices employed on the site during filling operations. Geotechnical investigation on the property abutting to the west indicates that native soils and debris-laden or incinerated garbage fill material were deposited on the site. The study resulted in the opinion that the existing fill soils were unsuitable for supporting permanent structures, unless they were designed as lightweight buildings, such as manufactured housing. Lightweight structures would require periodic re-Ieveling. The report recommended removal of approximately eleven feet of the incinerated fill and replacement with compacted fill prior to development of the area, even for lightWeight structures. Similar geotechnical study will be required on the King County property prior to site planning~ ANALYSIS Assuming that potential environmental constraints could be mitigated, the proposed uses, commercial and multi-family residential, would seem appropriate for the neighborhood. Due to the configuration of both land and development in this area, traffic is routed from the East Renton Plateau to the rest of the City by means ofNE 3rd and NE 4th streets almost exclusively. Due to the resulting high volume of traffic that passes by the property, a H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Map\2004 Map Amendments\Health Dept Property\KC Health staff rpt 2003-M-02 (rev). DOC 7/3012004 s Map Amendment #2003-M-02 Page 3 of5 Staff Recommendation 07/30104 development with a mix of uses, such as retail, office, and possibly housing, could be appropriate for the site and would probably have a high rate of success. Residential use is allowed in the CA zone as attached units with ground-floor retail / commercial use. The residential density allowed in the CA zone is 20 dwelling units per net acre (dula). Increasing the maximum density above that would require a zoning amendment. Typically, density calculations are based on net density, that is, land no~ included as critical areas, public and private streets, and. land already developed for other uses. For mixed-use development, land used for non-residential development is added to the net developable residential land. This increases the residential density of the project. The possibility of rezoning the property to Center Suburban (CS) has been discussed. In terms of uses, both the CA and CS allow the same uses. Development standards vary between CA and CS, however, as follows: CA Minimum lot size None Minimum density None Maximum density 20 dulac Maximum front setback None Maximum gross floor area of any single commercial CS 25,000 sf 10 dula 20 dulac 15 feet use on a site . None 65,000 gsf (exceeding 65,000gsfrequires a Conditional Use Permit) Maximum gross floor area of any single office use on a site . None 65,000 gsf (exceeding 65,000gsfrequires a Conditional Use Permit) In addition to the zoning development standards, the difference between development in the CA and that in the CS designation is that CA serves high-traffic-volume neighborhoods and the intention is for CS to provide goods and services to a larger service area. At this site, there is little or no commercial use on adjacent properties to support the concept of a "center." Another consideration is that in order to attract project financing for residential development, a private developer may need the ability to acquire the land for that portion of the project. In this case, the minimum lot size requirement ofthe CS zone could interfere with the potential necessity ofa subdivision of the property. CAPACITY ANALYSIS Presently, the 4.73 acre site is zoned IL which, when used in Renton's formula for the King County Buildable Lands, results in a net acreage of3.46 acres and would produce approximately 82 jobs. If the site were to be zoned CA, the formula produces a net acreage of 3.86. Assuming the Buildable Land net acreage in the CA designation, the residential H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Map\2004 Map Amendments\Health Dept Property\KC Health staff!pt 2oo3-M·02 (rev).DOC 7/30/2004 - - Map Amendment #2003-M-02 Page 4 of5 Staff Recommendation 07/30104 capacity could be 77 du at a density of 20 dufnet acre. Site specific net density will vary and would need to be confirmed during development review. It is premature to develop a capacity model since the various uses are unknown at the present time. Preliminary discussion, however, indicates that the followIng conceptual plan figures may be a starting point for determining future uses: Streets and open space Developable land Dwelling units (attached) Commercial space Public health facility (incl. dental fac.) R TC Apprenticeship Center RTC ESLlBasic Education Program Community Health Centers Community Health Center & King County school facility COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE 0.73 acre 4.0 acre 80 du (20 dufA) 200,000 sf 20-25,000 sf 50-90,000 sf (current size) 15-20,000 sf 30,000 sf 20-25,000 sf The [Comprehensive Plan Amendment] proposal shall demonstrate that the requested amendment is timely and meets at least one of the following criteria: 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by th~ City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives ofthe City Council. The application conforms with Item 1, as well as Item 2 of the above criteria, the Business Plan goal to "promote neighborhood revitalization." A. Review Criteria for Comprehensive Plan Amendments: 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by the City Council, or H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Map\2004 Map Amendments\Health Dept Property\KC Health staffrpI2003-M-02 (rev).DOC 7/30/2004 Map Amendment #2003-M-02 Page 5 of5 Staff Recommendation 07/30104 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. ZONING CONCURRENCY Concurrent rezoning to CA is required. A change of zone requires compliance with the following criteria (RMC 4-9-180F): 1. The proposed amendment meets the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and 2. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. At least one of the following circumstances applies: a. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or b. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. The application conforms to criteria I, 2, and 3a. CONCLUSION A Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the designation from Center Institution to Corridor Commercial appears, upon analysis, to be appropriate for this property. The proposed redesignation would meet, or could meet over time, most of the Corridor Commercial objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Development of the property for CA uses would not conflict with existing uses in the neighborhood. Redevelopment under the conceptual scenario presented by the proponents would serve many purposes in the neighborhood including providing upgraded facilities for the Public Health Department and Renton Technical College. Commercial/retail could serve the residential neighborhood of the South Highlands and provide support to the Center located at NE 4th Street arid Union Ave NE. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Map\2004 Map Amendments\Health Dept Property\KC Health staffrpt 2003-M-02 (rev).DOC 7/30/2004 NE 2nd SI .-----'Lj----n==r--=-:!.J -----+---, KC Dept. of Health Vicinity Map -Study Area . o 800 1600 F 1 : 9600 <::" KC Dept. of Health Aerial Map Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Sue Carlson, Administrator G. Del Rosario 30 July 2002 ., }8, -Study Area .. .1 o 100 200 f!'ii8'ii"!n QIXiC!iQQcg 1 : 2400 Z I'l L -I NE 4th St. KC Dept. of Health Sensitive Areas -StudyArea --s-> 40% Slope » < (1) :z: o o <> 4th NE ?nd Sf <I 400 800 :no a, 1 : 4800 ~ KC Dept. of Health Topography Map Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Sue Carlson, Administrator G. Del Rosario 301uly2002 o Study Area 1 m Interval Contour .. 400 800 .0000= Q~ ceccoeo:c, 1 : 4800 '---" r---l ,"-~ '---r---' l ,! 1\ 'j .~---,--.. --1/--._.1 !.--..-L 'I ' 1 1 \---~) j'--~ ----.-\ IC:A- --T--', 1---1 L_--l_~ __ .~ I i 1____ i L_-I <",::::..;;: _~. "'-"---j [ i! )--./"><y ~:I':"' i-"-j i R-~ 8\ L_/') Existing "'~ . .-' I ~<--J(-'-"-'-J---'.l .. ---/ " •• ! ," .•.•• • / -·t-· I/'\ -., '. I 'i' CO -j'-' , l.-.--.l---L··C., -.:J-~ ~_../.'\ /'~:i"::"i~l!l;:-i') Y--t<·~ too-x"'" ~ ,/ "!'~":"r-'-L! 1 tD-i '-.. -~---.-r ~_. .... R -e l.! j . f--~l,,-~_j [.--/'::~i " '-----), rJ I I '~8 ---: .... ': f f'! --( '/ '-;:~ .' t-,-; .L;.,.!._L_.L_ .. L_~.f_j L __ LJ_ .. _t ~ IL R-l0 CD > <.:r G) o L c= o .>: KC Dept. of Health Landuse & Zoning Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Sue Carlson, Administrator G. Del Rosario 301uly2002 IL -StudyArea Iiliiiilil CI· Center Institution !iIIIii'1il EA·C· Employment Area Commercial [==:J EA·I· Employment Area Instltutlonal -RM·I· Residential Multi·Family Infill c::=J RO· Residential Options c::=J RS· Residential Single Family Proposed o 400 pac 1 : 4800 R-l0 800 (U > <:::t. Q) o \.. - L o ~ ~ c AMENDMENT 2003-M-07 -Residential 4 Zoning "EVELOPMENT .. CITY OF RE~LAoNNtNG ·N AUG '2 6 200~ RECEIVED DESCRIPTION: As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments, the Residential 5 Zone is being replaced by a Residential 4 zone (maximum four (4) dwelling units per net acre). Residential 4 (R-4) was created in 2003 as an Overlay Zone in Residential Low Density Comprehensive Plan designated areas. ISSUE SUMMARY: i. What areas currently designated Single Family Residential with R-5 zoning should be mapped as Low Density Residential with R-4 zoning? 2. What areas currently designated Residential Rural with R-l zoning should be mapped as Low Density Residential with R-4 zoning? 3. Should small lot aggregations, known as "clustering" or cluster development oflots within R-4 zones be allowed? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • Recommend replacement of the Residential 5 Zone with a zone allowing a maximum of four (4) dwelling units per acre, known as the Residential 4 (R-4) Zone. • Recommend map amendments that result in changing the zoning of certain areas previously zoned Residential 1 (R-l), having a maximum of one (1) dwelling unit per net acre to R -4 zoning. • Recommend allowing the aggregation of smaller lots than normally allowed by the Development Standards into residential "clusters" in order to create open space and protect critical areas within the development. ANALYSIS: As part of the 2003 Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments, the Residential 5 Zone was shifted from the Residential Rural designation to the Single Family Residential designation. This change was based on the fact that Development Standards for the R-5 zone were so similar to those ofthe Residential 8 zone (Single Family Comprehensive Plan designation), that when developed, the two were virtually indistinguishable. The characteristics of the zone as it had been built out over the years since the R-5 was created were clearly urban in nature and did not reflect the low-density environment that was originally intended by the Residential Rural designation. At the same time, a Residential 4 Overlay District was created to further the objectives and policies of the Residential Low Density designation. In 2004, it was decided that the Residential Low Density designation policies would be furthered by elimination of the Residential 5 zone altogether and adopting the R-4 zoning where appropriate citywide. AMENDMENT 2003-M-07 -Residentia,l 4 Zoning At the same time, it was recognized that certain areas of the Residential Low Density designation that had been originally zoned Residential 1 (R-l) with a maximum density of one (1) dwelling unit per net acre, could be rezoned to R-4. The basis for this is the fact that R-l zoning was originally created as a zone that provided for protection of critical areas and preservation of natural resources and open space. Over the ensuing years, however, the ability ofthe City to more closely map such critical areas has improved significantly. Areas mapped R -1 for the purposes of protection of environmentally sensitive areas may not actually meet the standards for designation as critical areas. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The citywide rezone meets all of the review criteriafor a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The designation of Residential Low Density complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The zoning required to meet the requirements of an amended Comprehensive Plan would be Residential 4. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-1S0F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. At least one of the following circumstances applies 1. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or Page 2 of3 " } AMENDMENT 2003-M-07 ~ Residential 4 Zoning 11. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change . . The citywide rezone meets the review criteria for rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to adopt the citywide rezone. Page 3 of3 .; DE'vL,-OPMENT PtA , CITY OF AENTO~NtNG AUG "2 6 2004 AMENDMENT 2004-M-Ol -Jones CP AlRezone R'" " ECEIVEO DESCRIPTION: The applicant, Troy Jones, owns property fronting the Maple ~alley Highway at the west end ofa single-family residential subdivision known as "Maplewood" (Exhibits A-B). Mr. Jones has requested approval of a redesignation (Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment) and corresponding rezone of his property, currently designated Residential Options (RO) and zoned Residential 10 (see Exhibits C-D), to Convenience Commercial (both designation and zoning). The 0.21-acre site (9,002 sf) has been developed with a single-family, detached house since 1990, when a structure was moved onto the property. The 2,050 sf house was renovated in 1995. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Is the property suitable for commercial use? 2. What are the implications of the pending revisions to the requested zone, Convenience Commercial? The Convenience Commercial zone has been recommended to be replaced with "Neighborhood Commercial" zoning, Certain associated Development Standards have also had recommendations made for revision. 3. Is the subject lot properly designated for residential use? Is Residential 10 (R-lO) the appropriate zone, or would a rezone to Residential 8 (R-8), which is the abutting zone, be better? RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • A rezone and subsequent development for commercial use would be more disadvantageous to the public, in terms of health, safety, and welfare, than there would be advantages in terms of the potentially increased convenience to the neighborhood. • The pending changes to the Convenience Commercial designation and zone will not result in a change to the recommendations. • The property could possibly developed for an additional residential unit under the current Residential 10 zoning. Therefore, additional revenue could be generated from the existing zomng. • Although it was not requested by the applicant, an option would be to rezone the property Residential 8, which is the same zoning as most of the land in the vicinity. There would be no apparent advantage to rezone the property to Residential 8, however. AMENDMENT 2004-M-Ol-Troy Jone~ CPAIRezone ANALYSIS: Residential Use The property was redesignated and rezoned from a commercial designation to Residential Options and Residential 10 in 1995. The property is currently developed for residential use. The existing use, single-family, detached residential is permitted outright in the Residential Options designation and Residential 10 zone. The 9,002 sfproperty does not have'critical areas or roads that would be . deducted from the total lot area for the purposes of density calculation Exhibits E-F). Therefore, the density is 4.S4 dwelling units per net acre (du/a), which is below the approved range for the R-lO zone. The R-I0 zone density range is 7 to 10 du/a. If the property had another unit, the density would be 9.6S du/a, but 3 units would increase the density to 14.52 du/a, which is above the range (Exhibit G). The property could possibly be developed with an additional residential unit under the current designation and zoning. The range for the R-S zone is 5 to S du/a, so this property is currently developed below the range for the R-S zone as well (Exhibit H). Due to the location ofthe existing unit on the property, it appears that it would have to be demolished and rebuilt in another location on the lot to allow subdivision and development of two legal lots ~nder R-S zoning. , The subject lot is abutting two lots that are, like most of the Maplewood subdivision, zoned R-S and developed with single-family houses. A rezone of the Jones property to R-S would remove the out-of-character zoning from the property. Although single-family, detached residential is allowed in the Convenience Commercial zone, it is permitted as a pre-existing condition only. New single-family, detached residential is not allowed in the Convenience Commercial zone. Commercial Use The applicant has stated that the subject property, if redesignated, rezoned, and subsequently redeveloped for commercial use would serve the adjacent neighborhood. In fact, the property is not directly accessible from the adjacent neighborhood by road. It is not known if there is an informal pathway to the property from the neighborhood. If so, it would be across property owned by others (Exhibit I). It is much more likely that a commercial business at this location would draw its customers from the pass-by traffic on the heavily traveled Maple Valley Highway. Due to the volume of traffic, vehicles exiting or entering the traffic lanes may be at risk for accidents. The property is located on a curve in the road that may increase traffic danger (Exhibit 1). Cars crossing lanes with on-coming traffic could be imperiled. While it is true that there are other commercial uses (zoned Convenience Commercial) in the vicinity, they are accessed from secondary or collector streets and not the principle arterial of the Maple Valley Highway (Exhibit K). Page 2 of4 AMENDMENT 2004-M-01 -Troy Jones CPAIRezone The businesses in the vicinity include a small, neighborhood grocery store and two office buildings. The applicant has indicated the property, if rezoned, could be developed as a "small country store, with a sandwich and coffee shop" (Application, October 1,2003). It appears, however, that the immediate neighborhood is already served by a grocery, within walking distance of the houses in the area (Exhibit L). If rezoned, other potential uses in addition to retail that would be allowed are office, eating and drinking establishments, including drive-through fast food restaurants, and services such as beautylbarber shops. The range of allowed uses may be expanded during the review process for implementation of the new Neighborhood Commercial designation. Some ofthese uses, such as offices, could possibly do business without a significant increase in access and egress to and from th~ property. Insurance and travel agencies; for example, do much of their business electronically or by telephone. Once rezoned, however, other uses that do have high traffic volumes would be allowed. Likewise, the existing structure; a single-family house, has architectural character and could be adapted for a variety of commercial uses. Once rezoned,however, the house could be demolished and replaced with a franchise commercial structure. Parking would have to be accommodated entirely on the property for employees and users .. The most likely configuration, given the small size of the lot, is a structure at the back of the property with parking between it and the road. This "strip mall" layout is not the preferred type along the Maple Valley Highway. An argument could be made that the previous commercial use of the property, a vehicle service station, established a precedent for business use ofthe property. The fact that the service station closed and the property rezoned from the B-1 commercial zone to a non- commercial use indicates that a commercial use was not appropriate at that location. Also, there has been a significant increase in use of the Maple Valley Highway over the past fifteen years due to more development occurring east of Renton. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: If rezoned for commercial use, assuming the floor area ratio (FAR) is 0.29 and 400 square feet per employee, the total employment capacity for the property would be seven. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-0200 (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or Page 3 of4 AMENDMENT 2004-M-Ol -Troy Jones CPAfRezone 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The requested rezone does not adequately meet any of the review criteria for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment.· COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The current designation of Residential Options complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The zoning required to meet the requirements of an amended Comprehensive Plan would be Residential 10, as the p~operty is below the threshold for the Residential 14 zone. . . .. . DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. At least one of the following circumstances applies 1. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or ii. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements; permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. The requested.rezone does not adequately meet any of the review criteriafor a rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to deny the requested rezone. Page 4,of4 .. Troy Jones Comp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Vicinity Map o 400 800 e~.t> Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning + am + Alex Pietsch, Administrator E h . b . t A ~ ~ G. Del Rosario XII 21 July 2004 Study Area I I I 1 : 4800 Troy Jones Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Aerial Map o 100 200 e~,(i Economic DeveloPlllent. Neighborhoods & Strategic Flanning -- -+ .. + Alex Pietsch, Administrator E h· b . t B ~ G. Del Rosario XII 21 July 2004 Study Area I I I I 1 : 1200 ,;.- Troy Jones Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Landuse-Zoning Map Il!l!!Sl!I!!!l§ CC-Convenience Commercial C=:J RO-Residential Options ~ RR·Residential Rural Proposed o I::=::J RS·Residential Single Family -Study Area ,,~ 200 400 -1 : 2400 \ \\ I \ .... i ------, \ \ \ RM-I .... / _,_/ .. ···· .. --·-··RM·~·i <l ~\,. \\y. ?,r ZONING P/BIPW Tl!CHNlCAL SEB.VICBS 12104/03 ExhibitD f .. ...... ____ . __ ...1 i i ! I iC~ f I ! CA Q) ~ Q) R-IO e ~ o ~ ILCP) R-IO _ 1-c;;;!go "yo 1:4800 C ! N I ! L _____ _ / I , L-.. -1_ .. F5 16 T23N R5E W 1/2 5316 6&.&-- ---/' ../" ·A;//' ~!/I . -__ /,;,,//lfI:'rf" II' . ___ -:'/. /' ,_==-=:-:----i ,2[' ;;,-'!" / -'''n _____ ;;{if/;/ '/'_~;;'t -'" 0-.... 7'. .... /'.' . ,;r,,,, _.' -~"~~ , ~. ./;(W;"! j'.'~' /. /-v' .' . <.'y" ' ""/,"'" /.,",;, ,/' / ' ~- .d' --~ , ; ... ,',/ . ,.' ~..., /1 -----,,,. .".' . /' ~ . .. .....--""./;? ., .' /' -" __ ""'" /"'C ~ _,;::~:?;/"",-- / I ') 4/'X/ ::-?-. , 3b:27-----., ___ .. /Y _ ___ / ,LX_ '. )' / l.,. / / , '/' ) I \ '/ / ./ } . X 29 15) ,/ /" , . ( " ./ ' .-' /' .. ".,./ -:"J' , .. ' " / /' ),' , ~ --. /,,'/ .. ;;' ~- /"" 22.16 I X i 21.03 X 19.59 X 19.56 X 1.3.58 X 21.26 .. -..•.•... )' .' 22. -X-~ X 19.69 )( '. X 13.58'·~"·· ""r .. ,' ........ :-:----I-----__ -v--.."-.......,, .,.<:: ,·· . .1.8.00 ••• '0../, 1-· .••• " I / ~ ;;~~~~ : ... ' . ~.' ~~>",-,/ , .. ' " (' :', :~. ': .'~~~.:~:::~ ..... . .. j --- "'\ ) -: ] I:' "" / li/! .. ~ ... , , / . / r -". "', ',' / F !"'J) \" ::<\ ) ( /./'/ /r~ ,\\ \ I . .' .. , / """ ,,'. ( //:/ .. ,.\ 0) i " .' ," ;1 I' I .. ,,, ...:~.:-:\ \\ ..... . ",. { c::) I ". """ I .,J C - """'".1-." ' , .. ' - .! " ; i i ~\'\ '-) I 'I '. // ')<'::'// 18.96 X 19.09'.:" I Troy Jones Comp Plan Amendment (2004-M-01) Tapa Map o 100 200 ei<i Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning +~+ AlexPietsch.,AdmlnlStrator Exh°b °t E G, Del Rosano 1 1 21 July 2004 Study Area 1 m Interval Contours I J I 1 : 1200 Xl ~ ~ Troy Jones Camp Plan Amendment (2004~M-01) Sensitive Areas Map o 100 200 ~ Economic Development, Neighbor.!'oods & S~rat~gi<;. Ptl!nning . ~1j£5ri:"";";-~· Exhibit F ---. -Study Area· ,.. >40% Slope I· 1 : 1200 Troy Jones Property 2904 Maple Valley Highway Density Worksheet for Development in the R-IO Zone According to Renton's City Code, the standards for new development in the R-I0 Zone require that residential densities fall within a range of 7 to 10 dwelling units per net acre acre. 1) Total parcel size minus street r-o-ws and sensitive areas: 9002.001 square feet 2) Net Acreage (line 1 divided by 43560): 3) Maximum and minimum allowed dwelling units and respective net densities: Max. (10) Min. 4) 9002.00 sq ft and Wdwelling units result in a density 0: 0.21 acres dwelling units net density 2 9.68 2 9.68 14.52 d.u./acre. Deductions from gross area: 0 sq ft for proposed easements, street right-of-way, and/or wetlands (excu( -Exhibit G Troy Jones Property 2904 Maple Valley Highway Density Worksheet for Development in the R-8 Zone According to Renton's City Code, the standards for new development in the R-8 Zone require that residential densities fall within a range of 5 to 8 dwelling units per net developable acre. (Section 4-31-5.0.2) The code does not require that the lots be developed simultaneously. However, the land must be platted so as not to preclude future development at an appropriate density. 1) Total parcel size minus street r-o-ws and sensitive areas: L..--__ 9_00_2_.0....Jlsquare feet 2) Net Acreage (line 1 divided by 43560): 0.21 acres dwelling units net density 3) Maximum and minimum allowed dwelling units Max. and respective net densities: Min. 4) 9002.00 sq ft and Wdwelling units result in a density of . 9.68 Deductions from gross area: H:IOIVISION.SIOEVELOP.SERIOEV&PLAN.INGIOENCALC.XLS Exhibit H Public Streets @ 0 sq. ft. Access Easemnt@ 0 sq. ft. Sensitive Areas@ 0 sq. ft. Total Deductions @ 0 sq. ft. 1 4.84 1 4.84 d.u.lacre. ---Renton City Limits] Parcels ~ Renton Aerial 0 ____ _ JONES PROPERTY ACCESS AVAILABILITY Exhibit I F"""'\HP4 Renton SCALE 1 : 1 ,480 100 0 100 200 300 FEET N A l:}--Renton City Limits Parcels ~ Renton Aerial MAPLE VALLEY HIGHvV A Y ALIGNMENT AT SITE Exhibit J Renton SCALE 1 : 5,922 ......... ---.-.-~-----------1 ---==q------1 500 0 500 1,000 1,500 FEET N A ~~=~ .. Renton City Limits Parcels ~ Renton Aerial MAPLEWOOD COMMERCIAL ACCESS Exhibit K Renton SCALE 1 : 1 ,480 ...--~ ~~------------~ i 100 0 100 200 300 FEET N A Renton City Lim~1 Parcels J ~ Renton Aerial _ COMMERCIAL USES AT MAPLEWOOD SITE 1. Office Building . 2. Vacant -- 3. Vacant 4. Grocery Store 5. Office Building Exhibit L SCALE 1: 5,922 Renton A APPLICATION 2004-M-02, SUNSET HEIGHTS RETIREMENT LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE. DESIGNATION FROM' RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY (RLD) TO RESIDENTIAL OPTIONS (RO) OWNER: LORAN B. HENDRICKSON FAMILY L.P. APPLICANT: CITY OF RENTON DESCRIPTION DEVElC . .." .... , CITY . L A '-/~j.I\I'I~..., ... U,--ENTON AUG 2 6 20M RECEIVED The proposal is to change the Comprehensive Plan land use designation for 6.15 acres fr~m RLD to RO if and when the subjeCt property is annexed into the City of Renton. The site is located along the south side of NE Sunset Boulevard (SE Renton-Issaquah Road) about 600 feet west of its intersection with . 148th Avenlie SE .. The site was included in a proposed 22.8-acre annexation into the City that was submitted on July 18, 2003. Although Council authorized the circulation of a direct petition to annex, the City has seen no response in the subsequent months. As a consequence staff consider this proposed anriexation dead. ISSUE SUMMARY 1) Whether there is sufficient justification for designating this property Residential Options (RO), given its location outside a Center and in the Honey Creek s:ub-basinofMay Creek with proximity to an inventoried 3 . I-acre wetland and Honey Creek? . . 2) Given the applicant's stated intent to develop a retirement residence on the subject site whether other alternatives to this proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment exist that would achieve the same objective? RECOMMENDATION Do not support this proposed Comprehensive Plan map amendment from Residential Low Density (RLD) to Residential Options (RO) with concurrent R-I0 zoning .. Retain the existing RLD designation with concurrent R-4 zoning at the time of annexation because it appears to be more consistent with the environmental sensitivity of the adjacent area and would help ensure that if residential uses other than a "retirement residence" are developed ori the site, it would be low density housing. BACKGROUND The 6.15 acre site has been designated Residential Low Density (formerly Residential RuraJ) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map since the mid-1990s. The site is currently designated Urban Residential-High on the King County Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map' and is zoned R-48, 48 dulac (gross) in the County. It is located within a strip of land running parallel to the Urban Growth Area boundary between 144th Avenue SE on the west and 148th Avenue SE on the east that is currently designated Residential Low Density (RLD), reflecting this area's environmental sensitivity (Honey Creek, May Creek, wetlands, erosion hazard areas, steep slopes, etc:) When this area was initially mapped it was intended to serve as a transition between the more urban land uses to the west arid the County's Rural Residential land use designation east of 148th Avenue SE. The subject site is located within Renton's Potential Annexation Area and is within an area where there has been considerable interest in annexation. Two recent examples are the recently approved APPLICATION 2004-M'()2 Hendrickson.doc\ July 9, 2003 Planning Commission Briefing Stoneridge Annexation to the north on the north side of NE Sunset Boulevard and the proposed Johnson Annexation; south of the subject site; at about SE 1 18th Street. Zones allowed under the RLQ designation include RC, R-l and R-4 (the latter is proposed to replace the. existing R-S zone). The area to. the north across NE Sunset alvd was prezoned by the City to the R-S zone, pursuant to RCW 43.21C.22 in 1997. The unincorporated area to the east and south, besides being designated RLD on the Comp Plan Land Use Map, is located in the City's newR-4 Overlay. District. It is anticipated that this area will be zoned R-4 upon annexation. With a RO designation and concurrent R-I0' zoning' "tetirementresidences" would be allowed as an administrative conditional use: Under the 'c~ent land use designation With the proposed new R-4 zone, "retirement residences" would also be allowed as a Hearing Examiner conditional use when located on a designated principal arterial. . ANALYSIS . . Iri order to determine the most appropriate land use designation and zoning for this site staff looked at two land use designations, Residential Options (RO), with R-I0 zoning, and the existing Residential Low Density {RLD} With either R-l or R-4 zoning .. The Residential Single Fainily (RS) land use designation was not looked at since the R-8 zone does not allow "retirement residences" as either a. permitted or conditional use. Mandatory mapping criteria for the existing RLD designation for this area was met when this area was mapped in the early 1990's. Inthe RO designation, a site must meet three pf the following five criteria to be eligible for mapping: 1. Area already has a mix of small-scale multi-family units or had long standing duplex or low density multiIHe-family zoning;' ..... 2. Development patterns are established;·' 3. Vacant lots exist or parcels have redevelopment potential; 4, Few new roads or major utility upgrades will be needed with future development; arid S. The site is located adjacent to a Center designation. The site appears to meet only.two of these criteria. The site has an existing trailer park on it and has had multi-family zoning on it for a number ofyears~ There are rio established development patterns in the area and the site is not located adjacent to a Center land use designation. Also, the site is not currently served by sewer so that sewer .Will have.to be extended to serve the site. Since retirement residences are not regulated by density but rather by lot coverage, building height, and setbacks, a higher density development could result potentially requiring more significant upgrades to serve it. . Because the site does not appear eligible for mapping to Residential Options the existing RLD designation should be retained, particularly if one of the three zones permitted under it would allow the applicant's preferred use; a "retirement residence" to be built. The site would most likely be zoned either R-l or R-4 upon annexation rather than RC under this land use designation. Because only the rear portion of the site' appears environmentally sensitive it is. unlikely. that the whole site would qualify for R-I zoning. A more likely scenario would be for the 6.1S-acre site to be rezoned upon annexation into the City to the proposed new R-4 zone. Further analysis below, under Comprehensive Plan Compliance, shows the difference in number of units allowed by the R-l zone, proposed new R;4 zone and the R-IO zone. APPLICATiON 2004-M-02 Hendrickson.doc\ 2 . July 9, 2003 Planning Commission Briefing ) CAPACITY ANALYSIS· Below is the calculated theoretical capacity for the subject site assuming an RO designation with R-I0 zoning and the existing RLD designation with R-I zoning. Estimated Residential Capacity; based upon 6. 15-acres (wI sensitive areas) Retirement Residence 14 units Use not s~bject to density * ·Permitted as Hearing Examiner Conditional Use COMPREHENSiVE PLAN COMPLIANCE 19 units Use not subject to . density * ·Permitted as Hearing Examiner Conditional Usel 58 units Use not to density * ·Permitted as Administrative Conditional Use The following analysis looks at the policies of Residential Low Density (RLD) and Residential Options (RO) designations in order to determine the preferred designation for this Comp Plan amendment and rezone. Given the site's sensitivity, particularly in its southwest .portion, the RLD designation seems most appropriate. Policy LU':'35.5, for example, speaks of development standards being developed such as those that encourage low impact development using landscaped buffers, open spaces, and other. pervious surfaces and significant native tree and vegetation retention and/or replacement. Policy LU 33.3 speaks of ensuring quality development through the establishment of development standards that address building design and landscaping issues. RO policies speak to larger developments with "central place public amenities .... such as a public square, opens pace park, civic or commercial uses" (Policy LU-43). Policy LU-49 address non-residential structures and states that they may be larger than residential structures but should be compatible in design and dimensions with surrounding residential development. The RO designation is intended to encourage high,.density mixed-unit type projects that are designed to resemble single-family neighborhoods and which are located near Centers. The existing RLD designation is intended to encourage lower density single-family detached units. Within this designation three zones allow retirement residences (RC, R·I, and the proposed new R-4 zone). In all three zones retirement residences are Hearing Examiner conditional uses. In the R-4 zone "retirement residences" would only be allowed when located on sites abutting designated major arterials. I Only allowed on site abutting designated principal arterial APPLICATION 2004-M-02Hendrickson.doc\ 3 July 9, 2003 Planning Commission Briefing AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA . RMC 4-9-020, Comprehensive Plan Adoption and Amendment Process requires that a proposal demonstrate that the requested amendment is timely and meets at least one of the following: A. Review Criteria for Comprehensive Plan Amendments: 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or . . . 2. The request supports the adopted business plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminatescOnjlicts with existing elements or policies, or .. . 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The proposed redesignation to the RO land use designation does not appear to be consistent with the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan. Specifically, under Future Housing: "Single family areas will continue to dominate the residential character of Renton. There areas will over time alsocdme to rejlect a greater diversity of population and housing stock. Increasingly single-family housing will be found in mixed single familylmult-family areas. New single family housing will also consist of a greater variety of unit sizes catering to different income groups, household sizes and life styles. " . Also, under Future Neighborhoods: "Outside of the down.town new residential neighborhoods would be organized in a way that would be reminiscent of small towns of the past. The newly developing areas would have a noticeable absence of large multi-family complexes. Small lot single-family and small multi- plex homes would be. most common. Buildings wouldface tree-lined streets with wide sidewalks.'~ .. A large high-density multi-story retirement residence on this site could definitely be out of character with the surrounding Residential Low Density and Residential Single Family hind use designations. ZONING CONCURRENCY. ill the case of Residential Options, the concurrent zoning would be R-I 0, 10 units per net acre. Without a development agreement limiting the future use of the site to "retirement residences;' up to 10 units per net acre could be developed on this site. Staff estimate, based upon citywide averages that 58 dwellings units could be built on this site (see table above), In the case of Residential Low Density, the concurrent zoning would most likely be R-4, 4 units per net acre for a total of 19 units if a retirement residence was not built on the site. CONCLUSION The land use designation most appropriate for the subject site appears to be the existing Residential Low Density designation. Upon annexation into the City concurrent R-4 zoning could be applied to the 6.15-acre site. Such zoning would allow a retirement residence to be built as Hearing Examiner conditional use. If for some reason the applicant decided not to develop a retirement residence on the site, future development would be limited to the same densities as properties to the south and east. APPLICATION 2004-M-02 Hendrickson.doc\ 4 July 9, 2003 Planning Conunission Briefing .J . . . . Comparative Matrix of Middle Density Land Use DesiWlatioti Policies Policy Within the Residential 4dulacre overlay area limit maximum density to 4 units per net acre to encourage larger lot development and increase the supply of upper income housing consistent with the City's Housing Element. Policy L standards should support higher quality housing through. provisions that encourage: a. A. variety of compatible housing styles making up block frorits; . b. Additional architectural features such as pitched roofs, roof overhangs,. and/or decorative corniCes,· fenestration and trim .. c. Building modulation; and use if durable exterior materials such as· wood, ·masoriry, stucco, or brick. Policy. LU-33.3. Ensure development by establishing development staridards that address building design and landscaping issues. APPLICA TION 2004-M-02 Hendrickson.doc\ Policy Net development densities should fall within a range of 5 to 8 du per acre. 4,500 sq. ft.· should be allowed in SF neighborhoods when fleidble development standards are used .. Policy LU-37. Maximum structures should generally not exceed· 2 stories. . Policy LU-39. Development standards· should address transportation. and pedestrian connections betWeen neighborhoods .. Policy LU-40.2. Site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes should be retained. rather than beorganiWI around interior courtyards or parking areas. neighborhoods may be considered if they meet three of the following criteria: a. Area already has a mix of small- scaie multi-family units or had long· standing duplex or low density multi-family zoning. b. Development established. patterns are c. Vacant lots exist or parcels have . redevelopment potential. . d. Few new roads or major utility upgrades will be need with future development. e. LU-53. Detached single family housing, townhouses, and small-scale multi-family units should be allowed. Policy LU-54. A units may consist of attached units, which includes townhouses and small- scale multi-family units. should reflect single family neighborhood characteristics such as ground-related orientation,. coordinated structural design, and private yards. 5 July 9, 2003PI:mning Commission Briefing C-J :::J 0-1 0 11- I H--\ I \---I rI ) t1 I H? ~ \1 ~ 3 t ~ k-rk I +--1 +--1 1---11 If--I'lA ~r II 11111111111'"'' --Sunset Heights-Comp--Plan Amendment (2Q04-M-01) Vicinity Map Study Area e:;O,(! Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning + .. + Alex Pietsch, Administrator ~ G. Del Rosario 21 July 2004 _ --City Limits _ . _ . _ Urban Growth Boundary ,,- , .. Sunset Heights Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-02) Aerial Map o 300 600 e~ Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning • ~ • Alex Pietsch, Administrator ~ G. Del Rosario 21 July 2004 Study Area I I I 1 : 3600 : -. tt. i: / ~. ! / ~ ~ ,'! -. ii' ~. ); I ! /,/ '--t-~ / \~, \\ ~ ! r ; . o o \0 o o M o o c.. ~ o o \0 M ..... ::::J .9 c o (.) , CO CO ~ @c= ... '" « Q) o 1 __ - I -6.E 4= .a E -.::t' CJ) ....-o o i ,I E ""C C Q) E J<C ........ Q) en c ::l en ~-I I L---..j _LLJ L:: E o :::J 0- 01 l HJ-\ ~ ~~~ . ~ -S t-- t-- (I)H ,~ =. ~ UJ~ 1111~thl \ ~ Sunset Heights Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-02) Sensitive Areas Map 'e~ Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning + AlIa + Alex Pietsch, Administrator ~ G. Del Rosario l 't 21 July 2004 Study Area ... >40% Slope o 300 600 I I I 1 : 3600 8 8 Sunset Heights Camp Plan Amendment (2004-M-02) Sensitive Areas Map e~~ Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning +.. + Alex Pietsch, Administrator ~ G. Del Rosario 21 July 2004 tS::S:3I R-4 Max. Overlay c::::J RO-Residential Options IiiiiIiiil RLD-Residential Low Density c::::J RS-Residential Single Family E:ZZI R-S Pre-Zone _.-UGB - -City Umits -StudyArea o 400 ···800 I I I 1 : 4800 r ·• . AMENDMENT 2004-M-03 -AnMarco CP A1Rezone DESCRIPTION: The applicant, Donald J. Merlino for AnMarCo, owns property fronting the Maple Valley Highway across from the Old Stoneway Concrete Plant Site (Exhibit 'A'). Mr. Merlino has requested approval of a redesignation (Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment) and corresponding rezone of the property, currently designated and zoned Center OfficelResidential (COR) (Exhibit B). This is the same designation and zoning that was requested by the property owner in the mid-1990s, and is the same as the Stoneway property across the highway. The applicant requested a designation of either Employment Area -Commercial or Convenience Commercial and zoning of either Commercial Arterial Convenience CommerciaL The 0.47-acre site (20,271 sf) has not been developed with structures, but is used for employee parking and storage of vehicles associated with the Stoneway facility (Exhibit C). The applicant intends to lease the land for five to ten years. The proposed use on the leased land is a drive-through espresso stand. The long-term use, by the owner, would be parking. The application was submitted by the property owner on behalf of the intended user, Teen Challenge International. Teen Challenge is a faith-based organization providing support services to victims of substance abuse. The drive-through espresso stand would become a component of the organization's work program. The work program provides work experience for program participants and income to defray the cost of the other program components, such as tuition. ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. The current designation and zoning allow commercial uses, but not a drive-through espresso stand. The applicant has indicated that either a Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone or a text amendment that would allow a drive-through retail use in the current zone would be acceptable. 2. Is the property suitable for the proposed use? 3. What are the implications of the pending revisions to the requested designations, Employment Area -Commercial and Convenience Commercial, and Convenience Commercial zone? Both the Employment Area-Commercial and Convenience Commercial designations have been recommended for revision. 4. What impacts could be associated with a rezone of the property? Amendment 2004-M -03 AnMarCo CP AlRezone RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY:' l ' .. • A Comprehensive Plan text ameridment, allowing drive-through retail uses in the Center (Commercial) OfficelResidential designation would not be appropriate because the use does not fit the vision for COR development. • A redesignation and rezone to Convenience Commercial would not be appropriate because the property does not fit the criteria for the designation or zone. Also, a rezone would be necessary in the ,future for the anticipated use of parking. • The sit€? is not well-suited for drive-through retail due to heavy traffic volume-safety issues on the Maple Valley Highway at that location. Significant road improvements would be required to adequately meet safety requirements. • . The pending changes to the Employment Area-Commercial and Convenience Commercial designations and CC ,zone will not result in a change to the recommendations. • The high landslide hazard zone may restrict some uses, such as the one proposed. , • Other uses that would be allowed if the rezone occurred would also be undesirable at this location. ANALYSIS: Employment Area -Commercial Desigp,ation and Commercial Arterial Zoning The applicant's first choice is to change the designation and zoning to Employment Area- Commercial and Commercial Arterial respectively. These changes would allow a drive- through espresso stand as a short-term use and parking as a future use. The Employment Area -Commercial Designation is being changed to "Corridor Commercial" in 2004. The Employment Area -Commercial/Corridor Commercial designations are intended to be areas with concentrated commercial uses. A single espresso stand, isolated from any other retail use does not meet the designation criteria. In addition, this parcel needs to be developed in conjunction with the larger property across the highway, of which it is a part by historical use, land use designation, and zoning. Convenience Commercial Designation and Zoning The applicant's second choice for designation and zoning is Convenience Commercial. This designation is also recommended for revision in 2004, to "Neighborhood Commercial." The intent of the Neighborhood Commercial is: " .. .is to provide small scale, low-intensity commercial areas located within neighborhoods primarily for ,the convenience of residents who live nearby." [Summary] and Page 2 of5 , ". Amendment 2004-M-03 AnMarCo CPAIRezone Objective LU-FF: Neighborhood Commercial designated areas are intended to reduce traffic volumes, permit small-scale business uses, such as commercial/retail, professional office, and services that serve the personal needs of the immediate population in surrounding neighborhoods. Neither the property at that location nor the proposed use meets the criteria for the designation. In addition, as the applicant has stated, the future anticipated use of parking would not be allowed in the Convenience Commercial zone. COR Designation and Zoning The property was designated and zoned Center OfficelResidential in 1995. The COR designation has been recommended for revision during the 2004 cycle of Comprehensive Plan amendments. The most significant change is to the name of the designation, "Commercial/OfficelResidential" to properly reflect the intention of COR development as mixed-use, combining commercial with office and urban-density residential uses. This change also acknowledges that the COR designations, while situated at key locations, may not function as "centers." It is intended that the COR designated land is master-planned and developed, either at once or in phases, as a coordinated project Flexibility of uses is possible, particularly due to site constraints, which may be the case in this situation, but as part of the master plan process, as stated in Policy LU-128: "Sites that have significant limitations on redevelopment due to environmental, access, and/or land assembly constraints should be granted flexibility of use combinations and development standards through the master plan process." The applicant has appropriately speculated that the long-term use ofthe parcel will be different from the short-term, leased use. He also believes the use will be tied to the future development of the larger property. These are the very reasons the master plan process is required prior to development of COR-designated land. The applicant has suggested that a Comprehensive Plan text amendment may be appropriate to allow drive-through retail uses in the COR. These uses were specifically excluded from those allowed in the designation, however, because that type of use does not fit the vision of the COR, as stated in the following Comprehensive Plan objective: Objective LU-U: Development at Commercial/Office/Residential designations should be cohesive, high quality, landmark developments that are integrated with natural amenities. The intention is to create a compact, urban development with high amenity values that creates a prominent identity. Appropriateness of the Property for the Intended Use The applicant has stated that the site, du~ to its narrow configuration, may be difficult to develop and therefore, has been used for parking of employee vehicles and company trucks. There are two factors, related to safety, that indicate this use may be the best for the property. Page 3 of5 Amendment 2004-M-03 AnMarCo CPAJRezone The Maple Valley Highway has experienced a significant increase in traffic volumes in recent years due to residential development east of Renton in Maple Valley, Black Diamond, and parts of King County. In 1990, the volume count Was 29,043 vehicles per day. In 2004, the traffic count increased to 39,330 vehicles per day. At the typical rate of speed at the location of the property, vehicles slowing to tum onto the property and then pulling back into traffic lanes could create significant hazards to other vehicles .. A new, dedicated right-tum lane and corresponding center, left-tum lane would increase vehicular safety significantly (Exhibit D). The cost of these improvements, however, may not be feasible for the intended short-term use. The other issue relates to the high landslide hazard on the slope above the site. Vehicular parking with limited opportunity for people to be on the site appears to be the preferred situation (Exhibit E). Other Impacts of Redesignation and Rezone of the Property If the property is redesignated and rezoned to Commercial Arterial, a wide range of commercial uses would be allowed. Just as this property has been deemed an inappropriate location for the requested use, so too would it be inappropriate for other uses allowed in Commercial Arterial zones. These would include: • Attached residential • Vehicle fueling station • Retail sales These uses are permitted in the Commercial Arterial zone. The Maple Valley Highway has very limited commercial use fronting directly on the road and has not been planned for development as a commercial corridor .. Sufficient capacity exists for uses dependent upon heaVy traffic volumes in the Corridor Commercial zones of the City (Sunset Boulevard, NE 4th, and Rainier Avenue corridors). In addition, a rezone of single-family residential land to commercial zoning on SW Sunset Boulevard is currently being considered. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: The capacity should not be changed because the uses, both current and requested, are commercial. REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G (at least one): I. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or Page 4 of5 Amendment 2004-M-03 AnMarCo CPAJRezone 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. The requested land use designation change or redesignation does not adequately meet any of the review criteria for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The current designation ()f Center/Office/R,esidential, when combined with the larger parcel across the Maple Valley Highway, complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Z()NING CONCURRENCY: The zoning meets the requirements ofthe current Comprehensive Plan designation. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. At least one of the following circumstances applies i. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or 11. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. The requested rezone does not adequately meet any of the review criteria for a rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to deny the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment and concurrent rezone. Page 5 of5 Renton City Limits I Parcels J 00 Renton Aerial __ _ AnMarCo Property OLD STONEWA Y CONCRETE PLANT SITE ExhibitA I""-'I_n~ Renton SCALE 1 : 2,551 200 0 200 400 600 FEET http://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf N A Friday, July 30, 2004 7:10 PM \ \ \ " CDR "-"--_._----- RC(P) ZONING PIBIPW TECBNlCAL SEIlVlCl!S W04I03 ., \ \/R'~\I \ \ :.~ .. ,.~......... ._---..;:------- "-., f ·····---------·-·--·~---------·-r-\·- \ \ RC i i l. ~-+-------~,.-......................... j __ ............................... L.._ .... . Exhibit B \ \ I ; Renton City Limits Parcels ~ Renton Aerial AnMarCo Property Current Use SITE Exhibit C ~n ~ ~ Renton SCALE 1 : 638 -----------.------~~----~----~ 50 0 50 100. 150 FEET http://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf N A Wednesday, July 28, 2004 7:0.1 PM Renton City Limits ] Parcels 00 Renton Aerial AnMarCo Property Access Exhibit D Renton . ~, ~. ;n .. '.' ·1 ..• ~ \ ' . ,... "i~~ ~ ," '. ,\, ',. ''Ii' -' , . • ,'''''-.' v-.4" ..;.- SCALE 1 : 1,480 ~~-~__ I' -I:: ~--------,-------~ 100 0 100 200 300 FEET http://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf "!:... N A Friday, July 23, 20044:29 PM AnMarCo Property Critical Areas Landslide Hazard Moderate Hazard Hi'gh Hazard ~--~ s Exhibit E SCALE 1 : 1 ,275 fii"C~=, Ji~~====== 100 0 100 200 FEET http://rentonnet.org/MapGuide/maps/Parcel.mwf Renton N ,:,~-::-. ::::j 300 A Wednesday, July 28, 2004 6:59 PM DEVELOPMENT P . ... C/lY f)F RENT~:' , ,. AUb 262004 ReceIVED AMENDMENT 2004-M-04 -Automall Area Zone Revisions DESCRIPTION: As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments, the Automall Improvement District is being expanded. The expansion of this area, with the Commercial Corridor Comprehensive Plan Designation, requires certain associated Comprehensive Plan redesignations and implementing rezones. The Automall is also being removed from the Employment Area -Valley designation and put in a more appropriate designation, in terms of current objectives and policies, the Commercial Corridor designation. ISSUE SUMMARY: I. Should the Automall Improvement District be expanded from Seneca Avenue SW to Oakesdale Avenue SWon the west and from Talbot Road S (on the north side of south Grady Way) to Wells Avenue S on the east? 2. Should the Automall be placed in the new Commercial Corridor Comprehenive Plan designation, rather than the current Employment Area -Valley? 3. The Employment Area -Valley (EA-V) would have to have a new boundary drawn on the north. A new Comprehensive Plan designation would be required (Employment Area -Industrial) for the former EA-V land. 4. Land between Seneca Avenue SW and Oakesdale Avenue SW would require rezoning from Industrial -Medium to Commercial Arterial. RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • Recommend expansion of the Automall Improvement District from Seneca Avenue SW to Oakesdale Avenue SW on the west and from Talbot Road S (on the north side of south Grady Way) to Wells Avenue S on the east. • Recommend that the Automall be placed in the new Commercial Corridor Comprehenive Plan designation, rather than the current Employment Area -Valley, with Commercial Arterial zoning throughout the district. • Recommend that the Employment Area -Valley (EA-V) have a new boundary on the north (interstate 405). A new Comprehensive Plan designation would be required (Employment Area -Industrial) for the former EA-V land. • Recommend map amendments that result in changing the zoning of certain areas previously zoned Industrial -Medium (1M) to Commercial Arterial (CA). ANALYSIS: As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the Automall Improvement District objectives and policies were strengthened to create even more of a consolidated retail areas AMENDMENT 2003-M-07-Automall Expansionand Associated Redesignations and Rezones for the purpose of automotive sales than previously. Also, since the District was originally formed, an automotive use has been developed on the northeast corner ofSW Grady Way and Oakesdale Avenue SW, on what was previously an undeveloped lot in the Industrial- Medium zone. For these reasons" an expansion of the Automall to Oakesdale is a logical modification of the Comprehensive Plan Map. Likewise, an automotive use is now located fronting on S Grady Way between Williams Avenue S and Wells Avenue S making expansion ofthe Automall also logical in an easterly direction to Wells Avenue. In order to expand the Automall and also put it into a new designation, the Commercial Corridor, the Employment Area -Valley north boundary needs to be moved south to the south side ofInterstate 405. Land formerly within the EA-V, north of the Automall, will now be designated Employment Area -Industrial, with the existing zoning ofIndustrial - Medium. ' REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or , , 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. This expansion and rezone meets all of the review criteria/or a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The designation of Commercial Corridor to the Automall District complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The redrawing of the north boundary of the Employment Area-Valley complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The zoning required to meet the requirements of an amended Comprehensive Plan Map would be Commercial Arterial. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and Page 2 of3 AMENDMENT 2003-M-07 -Automall Expansionand Associated Redesignations and Rezones b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. At least one of the following circumstances applies 1. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or 11. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. the expansion and rezone meets the review criteria for rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to adopt the redesignations, expansion and rezone. Page 3 of3 j DEVELOPMENT PUH'liti"\ " CITY OF REt-:-"',! AUG 2 6 200~ AMENDMENT 2004-M-05 -~e~~~!Y:fn~titutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions DESCRIPTION: As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the Centers designations, except the Urban Center and Center Village, are being eliminated. This requires new mapping of the designated areas and rezoning of land to the new implementing zoning for the replacement designation, Commercial Corridor. The new zoning is Commercial . Arterial, with the exception of land formerly designated Center -Institution. In the former Center -Institution areas zoned Commercial Office the zoning has been changed to Commercial Corridor. The Convenience Commercial designation and implementing zoning have been changed to Commercial Neighborhood (CN). The Residential Multi-family -Center Suburban (RM-C), Residential Multi-family- Neighborhood Center (RM-N), and Residential Multi-family -Intill have been consolidated into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone (RM-F). Areas previously designated Residential Options and and Residential Planned Neighborhood are being consolidated into a single designation, Residential Medium Density (the zones remain the same as existing). ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. Should the Centers designations, except the Urban Center and Center Village, be eliminated and replaced with the Commercial Corridor designation. The new zoning would be Commercial Arterial, with the exception of land formerly designated Center -Institution. In the former Center -Institution areas zoned Commercial Office the zoning would be changed to Commercial Corridor. 2. Should the Convenience Commercial designation and implementing zoning be changed to Commercial Neighborhood (CN)? 3. Should the Residential Multi-family -Center Suburban (RM-C), Residential Multi- family -Neighborhood Center (RM-N), and Residential Multi-family -Intill be consolidated into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone (RM-F)? 4. Should areas previously designated Residential Options and and Residential Planned Neighborhood be consolidated into a single designation, Residential Medium Density (with the zones remain the same as existing)? H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\2004\Map Amendments 2004\Centers, Institutional, Residential Rezones\Centers Institutional Residential Rezones.doc AMENDMENT 2004-M-05-Centers, Institutional"and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • Recommend that the Centers designations, except the Urban Center and Center Village, be eliminated and replaced with the Commercial Corridor designation. The new zoning would be Commercial Arterial, with the exception of land formerly designated Center -Institution. In the former Center -Institution areas zoned Commercial Office the zoning would be changed to Commercial Corridor. • Recommend that the Convenience Commercial designation and implementing zoning be changed to Commercial Neighborhood (CN). • Recommend that the Residential Multi-family -Center Suburban (RM-C), Residential Multi-family -Neighborhood Center (RM-N), and Residential Multi-family -Infill be consolidated into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone (RM-Fr • Recommend that areas previously designated Residential Options and and Residential Planned Neighborhood be consolidated into a single designation, Residential Medium Density (with the zones remain the same as existing). ANALYSIS: As part of the 2004 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, the commercial objectives and policies were strengthened to create "corridors" instead of "centers." It is expected that these business areas will evolve into stronger business districts, but in a linear form, rather than centers. Therefore, the designations have been reformed, and consequently renamed, "Commercial Corridor." The implementing zoning has changed in some areas, NE 4th Street corridor, the Sunset Boulevard corridor, for e~ample, to Commercial Arterial. Other areas, the Rainier Avenue Corridor and Automall Improvement District, for example, do not require a zoning change. The Center -Institution designation has also been changed to Commercial Corridor. Where the zoning was Center Office, it has been rezoned to Commercial Arterial. The CO'nvenience Commercial designation and zoning has had objective and policy changes and has been renamed accordingly to Commercial Neighborhood. It now more closely reflects the small, neighborhood quality of the business existing and envisioned. It has been determined that the Residential Multi-family -Center Suburban (RM-C), Residential Multi-family -Neighborhood Center (RM-N), and Residential Multi-family- Infill did not have significant differences in policy to be separate designations. Therefore, the recommendation is that they be consolidated into a single Residential Multi-family designation and zone (RM-F). Notes to the Development Standards may regulate individual projects if higher standards are required in certain areas ofthe City. Due to extremely limited land available for development in the gesignations of Residential Options and and Residential Planned Neighborhood, they have been consolidated into a single designation, Residential Medium Density. The implementing zoning, Residential 10 and 14 respectively remain the same. Page 2 of3 \. AMENDMENT 2004-M-05-Centers, Institutional, and Residential Redesignations and Zone Revisions REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-0200 (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or 2. The request supports the adopted Business Plan goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives of the City Council. These citywide redesignations meet all of the review criteria for a Comprehensive Plan map amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: The designation of Commercial Corridor complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. ' ZONING CONCURRENCY: The proposed rezones concurrent with the Comprehensive Plan. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-0200; and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposed zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. At least one of the following circumstances applies 1. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or 11. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. . The proposed rezones meet the review criteria for rezone. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to adopt the redesignations and rezones as proposed. Page 3 of3 .) DEVELOPMENT PLANNING _ CITY OF RENTON AUG '2 6 2004 RECEIVED AMENDMENT 2004-M-06 -SW Sunset Boulevard CP AlRezone DESCRIPTION: This Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone analysis was initiated by a referral from the City Council. A business, the Neck & Back Clinic of Renton, is located in a single-family residential zone (Residential 8) fronting on SW Sunset Boulevard. One block on SW Sunset Boulevard, between Earlington Avenue SW and Stevens Avenue SW, on the south slope of West Hill, is being studied for this redesignation. The Council would like to know if this area, in the vicinity of the N~ck & B~ck Clinic, would be suitable for a commercial use designation and zoning (Exhibit A). ISSUE SUMMARY: 1. The current designation and zoning do not allow commercial uses, except as in the case of at least one business on the block, they pre-exist the current designation and zoning. 2. Is the property suitable for commercial use? 3. Would a commercial designation and zoning be inappropriate for·the area and cause negative impacts? 4. What impacts could be associated with a rezone of the property? . RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: • A Comprehensive Plan amendment, to Commercial Corridor, that would allow commercial zoning would be appropriate for the designated area. • The area meets the criteria for the Commercial Arterial zone. • The site is well-suited for commercial uses and no negative impacts to the area are anticipated. ANALYSIS: The Neck & Back Clinic is a legal, nonconforming use, of fifty-years standing at this location, but is restricted in its ability to expand or upgrade its building, due to nonconformity with the Residential 8 (R-8) zoning (Exhibit A). This part of Renton was incorporated into the City in 1948. Houses on the block being considered for redesignation date from the early part ofthe last century with the oldest houses constructed in 1900 and 1904. The Neck & Back Clinic, built in 1953, is the newest structure on this block of SW Sunset Boulevard. As is typical of older parts of the City, blocks and lots are irregularly shaped (Exhibit B). Several houses probably predate the construction of Sunset Boulevard as it appears the lots were truncated by the road alignment. As a result, two lots, at 2,631 sf and 3,240 sf, are smaller than the minimum lot size (4,500 sf) in the R-8 zone. Amendment 2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard' CP AlRezone Another lot, at 10,780 sfis below the minimum density, and should be subdivided into two legal lots. These lots are all legal, nonconforming for the R-8 zone. Another lot within the area, has had duplex units since 1952. It, too, is legal nonconforming because multi-family is not permitted in the single-family zone. The only point of these facts is that a redesignation and rezone from single-family to commercial would not necessarily create increased nonconformity in the area. SW Sunset Boulevard cuts across the south slope of West Hill as it is aligned from Renton to Tukwila. As a result, there are slopes, some of which are significantly steep, on both sides of the road. The block being considered in this analysis is somewhat isolated from surrounding houses due to the slope downward across the street, on the south side of Sunset Blvd, and the upslope on the north side of the lots that front on SUllset. This topography, in fact, would make a logical limit line to a commercial zone, should one be found appropriate. The Employment Area -Commercial Designation is being changed to "Corridor Commercial" in 2004. The Employment Area -Commercial/Corridor Commercial designations are intended to be areas with concentrated commercial uses. ' Sunset Boulevard has significant volumes of traffic, but not in amounts so as to create a hazard for vehicles using the road. Due to its physical nature and the proximity of other commercial uses, the part of SW Sunset Boulevard fits the "corridor" configuration that is envisioned for the designation of Corridor Commercial. The corresponding zoning, Commercial Arterial (CA), wOlild also be appropriate for this area due to the nature of SW Sunset Boulevard. Existing structures are setback from the street right-of-way so that short-term parking could be accommodated along the road frontage. On the larger lots, additional parking space may be available toward the back of the lots. Smaller lots, and even some larger ones, may be consolidated in the future for redevelopment. Uses in the CA zone are those appropriate for high-volume traffic areas and include drive in/drive through retail, eating and drinking establishments, hotel/motel, on-site services, vehicle fueling stations, and medical/dental clinics, and offices. CAPACITY ANALYSIS: Area would change from seven single-family lots, one multi-family lot, and one business to 69,011 gross square feet of commercial land. [NEED TO COMPLETE ANALYSIS] REVIEW CRITERIA FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G (at least one): 1. The request supports the vision embodied in the Comprehensive Plan, or , 2. The request supports the adopted ,Business Plan'goals established by the City Council, or 3. The request eliminates conflicts with existing elements or policies, or Page 2 of4 ,) Amendment 2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard CPAIRezone 4. The request amends the Comprehensive Plan to accommodate new policy directives ofthe City Council. The requested land use designation change or redesignation meets the Business Plan Goal of promoting citywide economic development. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE: A redesignation to Corridor Commercial would comply with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Corridor Commercial designated areas are characterized by commercial uses in a linear urban form. These uses provide necessary goods and services for daily living, are accessible to near-by neighborhoods, serve a sub-regional market and ~ccommodate large volumes of traffic. Itis the intention of CitY objectives and policies that Corridor Commercial areas evolve from "strip commercial" linear business districts to business areas characterized by enhanced site planning incorporating efficient parking lot design; coordinated. access, amenities, and boulevard treatment. Corridor Commercial areas may include medium intensity levels of activity and a focal point of pedestrian activity and visual interest. It is anticipated, however, that intensity levels in these areas will increase over time as redevelopment of existing structures or development of vacant space occurs, increased land value makes redevelopment feasible, and land is used more efficiently. In these districts, provision of pedestrian amenities is encouraged, as are opportunities to link adjacent uses and neighborhoods. ZONING CONCURRENCY: The zoning of Commercial Arterial would meet the requirements of the recommended Comprehensive Plan designation. DECISION CRITERIA FOR CHANGE OF ZONE CLASSIFICATION The proposed rezone must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-180F: a. The proposed amendment must meet the review criteria in RMC 4-9-020G; and b. The property is potentially classified for the proposeci zone being requested pursuant to the policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan; and c. Atleast one of the following circumstances applies i. The subject reclassification was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning; or 11. Since the most recent land use analysis or the area zoning of the subject property, authorized public improvements, permitted private development, or other circumstances affecting the subject property have undergone significant and material change. _ Page 3 of4 Amendment 2004-M-06 SW Sunset Boulevard CP A1Rezone The requested rezone was not specifically considered at the time of the last area land use analysis and area zoning .. CONCLUSION: The recommendation is to amend the Comprehensive Plan and concurrently rezone the area fronting SW Sunset Boulevard between Earlington Avenue SW and Stevens Avenue SW to the Corridor Commercial land use designation and Commercial Arterial zoning. Page 4 of4 '. R-8 I I\A_-.-----·-r·-/ j.-y·r i .' --._-./ i / / i· 11 st. ;1 1M , J~ i i 111M ! ! 1~ ! ! i f ro ZONING PIBIPW 'J'J!CHNICAL SERVlCBS , WOf/03 C 1M C 1Mi CA --__ ,------·,1 - - --I!eDWIl dlt, LIml~ _ 'b-c!Y'" 41° 1:4800 EXHIBIT A r~ ..' I / t-----'----.,...,:::::....""-.-J ___ ! ii' ,.. __ I., { I I --........... '----If' . ! ~ .----,_1'/ . . IM---I rr-~~l'~" i-----r------ : 7 (/' '/1 . 1M ' li st. I .' f . ' . " 11M r~ ZONING p~ TECHNICAL SERvICES W().f/03 , IMI i I - - - -Renton dUy LiIni41 CA I ,,-__ ,~, ------j I EXHIBITB CITY OF RENTON Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Economic Development, Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning P/B/PW Technical Services G. Del Rosario Proposed 2005 (draft) o 4000 1 : 48000 8000 RESIDENTIAL Q. Low Density RcgiJcnli:d D Residential Single Family D Residential Medium Density D Residential Muhi-Fllmily ~ R-4 max. Overlay District CENTER DESIGNATIONS m Ccnh.T Downtown D Center Village l1li Urban Ccntcr-Nonh I!!!I Comm",-rci:lI Office R~iJcnlial EMPLOYMENT AREA DESIGNATIONS D Employment Arca . Imhlstri .. ) ~ Employment Area· Valley MISCELLANEOUS DESIGNATIONS D Commcrdal Ncighhorh(Wu.1 ~ Carrillor Commcrdal CilyLimils Umnn (iro,,",h Hound .. ry I J "'G AUG '2 6 2uUlt. RECElVED 4-2-010 ZONES AND MAP DESIGNATIONS ESTABLISHED to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-010 ZONES AND MAP DESIGNATIONS ESTABLISHED: A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATIONS: The City has been divided into comprehensive land use designations: COMPREHENSIVE MAP PLAN DESIGNATION SYMBOL ~itlerniaJ-gmatResidential Low Density ~(RLD) Residential Single Family (RS) ~9siEi9Rtial Gl'lliGAs fRGt Residential I2laRReEi ~Jei€lRgefReegMedium Density ~(RMD) Residential Multi-Family Infill (RM-I) GeRteF J':IJeigRseFReeEi fGN1 GeRleF Sl,l91,lF9aR ~ GSRt9F QewRlewRUrban Center North fGG}-(UC-N) Urban Center -Downtown UC-D ~CommericaIlOffice{-Residential (COR) Center Village (CV) GeRleF IRsliMieRal fGIt Corridor Commercial (CC) Eml'lleymeRI AF9a Gemm9FGiai ~ €Awleym9Rt AF9a GffiG9 ~ Employment Area Industrial (EAI) Employment Area Valley (EAV) Eml'lleym9Rt .o.F9a +faRsitieR feA+t GeRlJ9Ri9RGe Commercial Neighborhood {Gq-(CN) B. ZONING MAP: This Chapter shall consist of this text as well as that certain map on file in the Office of the City Clerk designated as the Zoning Map of the City, The boundaries of the various districts shall be shown on the Zoning Map and are H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-010 leg.doc Page 1 of 4 I I I I I hereby made a part of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). This Chapter is to be read and interpreted in light of the contents of the Zoning Map. C. ZONING DISTRICTS: The City is hereby divided into the following types of zoning districts and the following map symbols are established: ZONE MAP ; SYMBOL Resource Conservation (RC) , Residential-1 Dwelling Unit Per Acre (R-1) Residential-&-!.Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-~) Residential-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-8) Residential Manufactured Home (RMH) Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-10) Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-14) Residential Multi-Family Urban . (RM-U) Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) Residential Multi-Family Slli:JI:II:baA {-RM-G1(RM-F) ~esideAlial Mlliti ~amily /lJei§Ri:J9FR999 {RM-N1 ~esil::leAtiaJ..Mlllti ~amil'lIAfill tmM-} Light Industrial (IL) Medium Industrial (1M) Heavy Industrial , (lH) GeA'JeAisAS9 GemmefGiat fGGt Gem&l'-Commercial Neighborhood (CN) Center [311011FsaAVillage {GS}(CV) Commercial Arterial (CA) Center Downtown (CD) Commercial Office (CO) H:\EDNSP\Coll1p Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-010 leg.doc Page 2 of 4 ) .. Geffie.l:-Commercial Office Residential (COR) Urban Center -North 1 (UC-N1) Urban Center -North 2 (UC-N2) D. ZONES IMPLEMENTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Comprehensive Plan Designations are implemented by certain zones: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION IMPLEMENTING ZONES Resource Conservation (RC) Residential Fh:lFal (FlFl)Low Density (RLD) Residential-1 DUlAC (R-1) Residential-&4.DU/AC (R-§1) FlesigeAlial 5 DUlAC (Fl 5) Residential Single Family (RS) Residential-8 DUlAC (R-8) Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) Residential OptiOAS (FlO)Medium Density Residential-10 DUlAC (R-10) Residential Manufactured Home Park (RMH) (RMD) Residential-14 DUlAC (R-14) FlesigoAtial J2laAAOg Noi€jRi:leFReeg (FlJ2f!.J) FlosigeAtial 14 QU,lAC (Fl 14) Residential Multi-Family IAfili (FlM IHRM) Residential Multi-Family IAfili (FlM I) (RMU. RMI. RMF) COAloF ~joi§Ri:loFReOg (CN) COAloF Nei§Ri:loFR009 (CN) RosigeAlial Multi Family Cenlm NeigRi:leFheeg ~ Cenlm Sui:luFi:lan (CS) CeAleF Sui:lufi:lan (CS) ResigeAlial Multi Family Contef Sui:luFi:laA (RM C) Center Downtown (CD) Urban Center Downtown (!,!C:D) Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U) Residential Multi-Family Traditional (RM-T) Urban Center North (UC-N) Urban Center North 1 (UC-N1) Urban Center North 2 (UC-N2) Geffie.l:-Commercial/G#iGe-Office/Residential GeAtefCommercial-LOfficeL Residential (COR) (COR) CommeFGial Office (CO) Centef-lflSliM-iGnal-tG1f InglolslFial bi§hl (Ib) Residential-10 DUlAC (R-10) FlesigOAlial 14 QUIAC (R 14) Center Village (CV) Residential Multi-Family Center Suburban (RM-C) Residential Multi-Family Urban Center (RM-U) Center SIoli:luFbaA (CS)Village (CV) employment AfOa CommeFcial (eAC) CemmefCial AfleFial (CA) empleymoAt Afea Offico (eAO) GGmmofcial Offico (CO) Commercial Arterial (CA) Corridor Commercial (CC) Commercial Office (CO) Industrial-Light (IL) Industrial-Light (IL) Employment Area Industrial (EAI) Industrial-Medium (1M) Industrial-Heavy (IH) Commercial Arterial (CA) Employment Area Valley (EAV) Commercial Office (CO) Industrial-Light (IL) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendmenls\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-010 leg.doc Page 3 of 4 Industrial-Medium (1M) Industrial-Heavy (IH) Resource Conservation (RC) GORloF QawRtawR (GQ) , GORtor Offioo RosidaRtial (GOR) e.mploymoRt Ama Tr~ G~I Offico (GO) ffi~ Light (IL) IAdl:lslrial J=loa\<y (11=1) COAVOAioAGO Commercial Neighborhood GOAVOAioACO Commercial NeighborhoodfGq(CN) fGq(CN) E. ADDITIONAL RESTRICTIONS ON LAND USE: TYPE OF LAND USE RESTRICTION ZONING MAP SYMBOL Auto Mall Restrictions Dot Pattern Public Use Designation ~'P" TYPE OF LAND USE RESTRICTION REFERENCE OR CODE SECTION NO. Airport-fleIate4-ComQatible Land l,Ise Restrictions RMC 4-3-020 Aquifer Protection Restrictions RMC 4-3-050 Auto Mall Restrictions RMC 4-3-040 Downtown Core Area RMC 4-2-070M and 4-2-080C Downtown Pedestrian District RMC 4-2-070M and 4-2-0800 Northeast Fourth Business Corridor RMC "P" Suffix Procedures RMC 4-3-080 f2laAAo9 61l'lit Qo\<olopmol'lts RMC 4 Q HiQ Rainier Avenue Business Corridor RMC Restrictive Covenants See Property Title Report Sl:IburbaA/NoighborhoG4-Center Village Residential Bonus RMC 4-3-095 District Sunset Blvd Business Corridor RMC Urban Center Design Overlay (Areas "A." aM "B." and "CU ) RMC 4-3-100 (Ord. 1472, 12-18-1953; Ord. 3101,1-19-1977; Ord. 4302,12-17-1990; Ord. 4519,5-15-1995; Ord. 4851, 8~7-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updute\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-010 leg.doc Page 4 of 4 .1 .. pt»lNING OEV~~~~~WENTON AUG l 6 2Q\l1t· RECE\VED 4-2-020 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-020 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS: A. GENERAL: The Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element policies for each corresponding zone classification and the Community Design Element, Housing Element, Environmental Element, and Utilities Element shall be used together with +!he purpose statements for each zone and map designation set forth in the following sections shall be used to guide interpretation and application of land use regulations within the zones and designations and any changes to the range of permitted uses within each zone through amendments to the code. Additionally, Reviewing Official approval of projects in the zones is contingent upon the determination that the proposed developments are consistent with the purpose of the zone and the policiespurpose and intent of the Land Use DeSignations and guiding policies of the Comprehensive Plan. B. RESOURCE CONSERVATION ZONE (RC): The Resource Conservation Zone (RC) is established to provide a very low- density residential zone wh-iGA-that endeavors to provide some residential use of lands characterized by extensive critical areas or lands with agricultural usesconserve critical areas and maintain agricultural activities. This zone promotes uses that are compatible with the functions and values of designated critical areas and allows for continued production of food and agricultural products. No minimum density is required. The Resource Conservation Zone is also intended to provide separation between areas of more intense urban uses; encourage or preserve very low-density residential uses; reduce the intenSity of uses in accordance with the extent of environmentally sensitive areas such as floodplains, wetlands and streams, aquifers, wildlife habitat, steep slopes, and other geologically hazardous areas; afI€I.-aliow for small-scale ~farming to commence or continue and provide viable uses within urban separators.~ C. RESIDENTIAL-1 DUIACRE (R-1): The Residential-1 Dwelling Unit Per Acre Zone (R-1) is established to provide and protect suitable environments for residential development of lands characterized by pervasive critical areas where limited residential development will not compromise critical areas. The zone provides for suburban estate single- family and clustered suburban estate single family residential dwellings, at a maximum density of one dwelling unit per net acre and allow~ for small scale ootmy-farming associated with residential use. It is further intended to protect open space and critical areas, provide separation between neighboring jurisdictions through designation of urban separators, and prohibit the development of incompatible uses that are detrimental to the residential or natural open space environment. No minimum density is required. D. RESIDENTIAL-~5 DUIACRE (R-~): The Residential-~ Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-~e) is established to promote urban single-family residential neighborhoods of intermediate density, H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 1 of 8 · ',' serviceable by urban utilities and containing amenity open spaces. The ," Residential-.1a Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-.1a) will allow a maximum net density of fivefour (a,1) dwelling units per net acre. No minimum density is required. The R-.§.1 designation serves as a transition between rural designations and higher density and more intense zones. It is intended as an intermediate density residential zone; applied to Residential Low DensitySingle Family tRSB(RLD) areas within one half (112) mile of the King County Urban GroyJth Area Line and to Residential Rural (RR) areas with no significant environmental constraints, Aggregation of smaller lots within the 4 du/net acre density Traditional or cluster development is allowed, with clustering used to create open spaces that protect critical areas as well as extend open space amenities available to the residents. Small lot aggregations The clustering of development may also be allo ..... ed to meet objectives such as the efficient provision of sewer service. E. RESIDENTIAL-8 DUIACRE (R-8): The Residential-8 Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-8) is established for single family residential dwellings allowing a range of five.1 (a,1) to eight (8) dwelling units per net acre, with tho goal of obtaining a density of eight (8) dwolling units per net acre. Development in the R-8 Zone is intended to create fleW opportunities for new single family residential neighborhoods and to facilitate high-quality infill development that promotes reinvestment in existing incroases density while maintaining the single family character of the existing neighborhood~. It is intended to accommodate uses that are compatible with and support a high quality tI:le-residential environment and add to a sense of community. F. RESIDENTIAL MANUFACTURED HOME PARK ZONE (RMH): The Residential Manufactured Home Park Zone (RMH) is established to promote development that is single family in character, developed to offer a choice in land tenancy. Standards provide for safe and high-quality manufactured home neighborhoods. The RMH Zone is intended to protect established manufactured home parks and to expand the variety of affordable housing types available within the City. G. RESIDENTIAL-10 DUIACRE (R-10): The Residential-10 Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-10) is established for medium density residential development that will provide a mix of residential styles including detached dwellings or semi-attached dwellings on small lots, attached townhouses, and small-scale attached flat dwellings. Development promoted in the zone is intended to increase opportunities for detached and semi-attached single family dwellings as a percent of the housing stock, as well as allow some small-scale attached housing choices and to create high-quality infill development that increases density while maintaining the single family character of the existing neighborhood. Allowable base densities range from four seveA-(.1+) to ten (10) dwelling units per net acre, with a total density bonus of thirteen (13) dwe-ll+n~s per aero for ono hundred pOffient (100%) detache€l dwellings. The zone serves as a transition to higher density multi-family zones. H. RESIDENTIAL-14 DUIACRE (R-14): H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\AmendmenLs\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg. doc Page 2 of 8 The purpose of the Residential-14 Dwelling Units Per Net Acre Zone (R-14) is to encourage development of new residential neighborhoods that provide a mix of detached dwellings, semi-attached dwellings, and attached dwelling structures organized and designed to combine characteristics of both typical detached single-family and small-scale multi-family developments. Densities range from eight (8) to fourteen (14) units per net acre with opportunities for bonuses up to eighteen (18) dwelling units per acre. Structure size is intended to be limited in terms of bulk and scale so that the various unit types allowed in the zone are compatible with one another and can be integrated together into a quality neighborhood. Project features are encouraged such as yards for private use, common open spaces and landscaped areas that enhance a neighborhood and foster a sense of community. Civic and limited commercial uses may be combined with residential development when they support the purpose of the: designation. I. RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM): 1. Purpose: The Residential Multi-Family Zone (RM) is established to implement the Multi-Family policies of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan.provide and protect.-The RM Zone provides suitable environments for multi-family dwellings. It is further intended to conditionally allow uses that are compatible with and support a multi-family environment. 2. Classifications: The density allowed under this zone will be identified by the suffix that is applied. This zone will normally be applied with one of five (5) suffixes: a. "u" (Urban Center): The RM-U Zone provides for high-density, urban-scale multi-family residential development that supports the downtown and allows for alternative transportation mode choices. Development standards promote a pedestrian scale environment and amenities. Density ranges from twenty five (25) to seventy five (75) du/acre. This zone, combined with the CD and RM-T Zones, is intended to implement the Urban Center defined in the Comprehensive Plan. b. "c" (Suburban Center Village): The RM-C Zone is intended to support nearby commercial centers. The residential scale and density is consistent with the scale and intenSity of the Center SuburbanViliage Zone. Density ranges from ten (10) to twenty (20) du/acre. c. "N" (Neighborhood Center): The RM N Zone is intended to support nearby commercial centers. The rosidential scale and density is consistont with the scale and intenSity of the Center Noighborhood Zone. Density ranges from ten (10) to fifteen (15) du/acre. £G. "IE" (Infill): The RM-l-EZone allows for the development of both infill parcels in existing multi-family districts with compatible projects and other H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 3 of 8 multi-family development. Density ranges from ten (10) to twenty (20) du/acre. ge. "T" (Traditional): The RM-T Zone occurs in areas where compact, traditional residential neighborhood development already exists, or in Comprehensive Plan designations where traditional residential neighborhoods are planned in the future. Density ranges from fourteen (14) to thirty five (35) du/acre. (Amd. Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002) J. CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ZONE (CClli: The purpose of the ~Commercial Neighborhood Zone (CGt:!) is to provide for small-scale convenience retail/commercial areascontors offering incidental retail and service needs forBf the adjacent area. Uses serving a larger area may be appropriate if they also serve the residents of the immediate area and are compatible with the scale and character of the neighborhood. This designation is the smallest and least intensive of the City's commercial zones. K. CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) AND CENTER SUBURBAN (CS)VILLAGE ZONES (CV): 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Village Neighborhood and Conter Suburban Zones (CN; CSCV) is to provide for mixed-use commercial activitiesGefltoJ:s located outside the Urban Centerdo'NntO'.~m RentoR. Use allowances promote commercial and retail development opportunities for residents to shop locally. Uses and standards allow complementary, higher- density residential development that supports the Centers, and discourage garden-style, multi-family development. The Suburban and Neighborhood Conter Residential Bonus District is applied to portions of the CN and CS Zones in order ~l:Hfe.. The Center Village Residential Bonus District supports superior residential projects wA-iGR-that complement commercial uses, provide ground floor commercial activity along arterials, and provide transition between intensive commercial areas and surrounding single:-family and multi-family neighborhoods. 2. Scale and Character: The eN and CS Zones differ in terms of character, density, intensity, and height: a. eN Zone; Tho Contor Neighborhood Zone is intonded to provido s~itablo pedestrian oriented onvironmonts for neighborhood soale retail and oommeroial developmont, and to serve tho noeds of the neighborhood abutting or adjaoent to tho Center. Floor area, heights and density aro int~nded to reoognize tho f~notion of the ~fFel:lnding neighborhoods. b. CS Zone: The Center Village Suburban Zone is intended to provide suitable environments for district-scaled retail and commercial development serving more than one neighborhood, but not providing City-wide services. The CS Zone allows for a greater floor area, height and density than the Center Neighborhood ~e., H:\EDNSP\Colllp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updure\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 4 of 8 £ L. COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL ZONE (CA): The purpose of the Commercial Arterial Zone (CA) is to provide suitaBle environments for auto oriented commercial development.evolve from "strip commercial" linear business districts to business areas characterized by enhanced site planning. incorporating efficient parking lot design coordinated access, amenities and boulevard treatment. The CA Zone provides for a wide variety of indoor and outdoor retail sales and services along high-volume traffic corridors. The zone includes four designated business districts along mapped corridors with development standards designed to encourage concentrated commercial activity. a focal point of pedestrian activity along the corridor, and visual interest. Designated business districts include: Renton Automall. Sunset Boulevard Corridor, North Fourth Corridor. and the Rainier Avenue Corridor. The CA zone is intended to implement the Corridor Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation. M. CENTER DOWNTOWN (CD): The purpose of the Center Downtown Zone (CD) is to provide a mixed-use urban" commercial center serving a regional market as well as high-density residential development. Uses include a wide variety of retail sales, services, multi-family residential dwellings, and recreation and entertainment uses. This zone, combined with the RM-U, is intended to implement the Urban Center defined in the Comprehensive Plan. N. COMMERCIAL OFFICE ZONE (CO): The Commercial Office Zone (CO) is established to provide areas appropriate for professional, administrative and business offices and related uses, offering high- quality and amenity work environments. Office uses of various intensities are allowed in these areas to create opportunities for Class I Office environments. an Employment Conter as dofined in the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, a mix of limited retail and service uses may be allowed to primarily support other uses within the zone, subject to special conditions. Limited light industrial activities, which can effectively blend in with an office environment, are allowed as are medical institutions and related uses. O. CENTERCOMMERCIAU-OFFICEl-RESIDENTIAL ZONE (COR 1, COR 2, and COR 3): 1. Purpose: The purpose of the Center Office Residential Zone is to provide for a mix of intensive office, hotels and convention centers and residential activity in a high-quality, master planned development, that is integrated with the natural environment. Commercial retail and service uses that are architecturally and functionally integrated are permitted. Also, commercial uses that provide high economic value may be allowed if designed with the scale and intensity envisioned for the COR Zone. Policies governing these uses are contained in the Land Use Element, Center Office Residential section, of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The scale and location of these sites will typically denote a gateway into the City and should be designed accordingly (see also Land Use Element, Community Design -Gateways section). Since the sites function as gateways, site planning should incorporate features of interest to the users. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendmenls\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 5 of 8 2. Location: In order to address differing site conditions, and recognizing the gateway and environmentally sensitive features of these sites, this zone is divided into three (3) sections: a. COR 1 is applied to the property commonly known as the Stoneway Concrete Site. b. COR 2 is applied to the property commonly known as the Port Quendall Site. c. COR 3 is applied to the properties commonly known as the Southport and Fry's Sites. 3. Scale and Intensity: COR 1 and 2 share the same uses and development standards, but differ in heights allowed. COR 3 shares a majority of uses allowed in COR 1 and COR 2 as well as most development standards, but differs primarily in densities allowed. (Amd. Ord. 5001,2-10-2003) P. INDUSTRIAL-LIGHT ZONE (IL): The purpose of the Light Industrial Zone (IL) is to provide areas for low-intensity manufacturing, industrial services, distribution and storage. Uses allowed in this zone are generally contained within buildings. Material and/or eqUipment used in production are not stored outside. Activities in this zone do not generate external emissions such as smoke, odor, noise, vibrations or other nuisances outside the building. Compatible uses which directly serve the needs of other uses in the zone are also allowed. Q. INDUSTRIAL-MEDIUM ZONE (1M): The purpose of the Medium Industrial Zone (1M) is to provide areas for medium- intensity industrial activities involving manufacturing, processing, assembly and warehousing. Uses in this zone may require some outdoor storage and may create some external emissions of noise, odor, glare, vibration, etc., largely contained on site. Compatible uses which directly serve the needs of other uses permitted within the district are also allowed. R.INDUSTRIAL-HEAVY ZONE (IH): The purpose of the Heavy Industrial Zone (I H) is to provide areas for high- intensity industrial activities involving heavy fabrication, processing of raw materials, bulk handling and storage, construction and heavy transportation. Uses in this zone may require large outdoor areas in which to conduct operations and produce environmental impacts beyond individual sites that require isolation. from more sensitive land uses. Compatible uses which directly serve the needs of other uses permitted within the district are also allowed. S. URBAN CENTER -NORTH ZONES (UC-N1 AND UC-N2): H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 6 of 8 2 .---- 1. Purpose: The Urban Center -North zones are established to provide an area for pedestrian-scale mixed use development that supports the residential and employment goals of Renton's Urban Center. The UC-N1 and UC-N2 zones are intended to attract a wide range of office, technology, commercial and residential uses. The overall mix and intensity of uses within both zones will develop over time. Consequently, decisions made in early phases of redevelopment will need to take into consideration the potential for further infill and intensification of uses. The overall mix and intensity of uses is intended to create an urban rather than suburban character. The form of development is expected to use urban development standards and therefore, setbacks, heights, landscaping, parking and design standards are to be urban in scale and configured in a layout utilizing the street system to create a human-scale pedestrian-oriented new center. Uses that support urban center development are allowed. Development is expected to include amenities such as gateways, water access, and open space. High quality development is anticipated, encompassing a mix of residential neighborhoods, shopping and employment districts and public facilities. The designation is also intended to allow continuation of airplane manufacturing and accessory airplane manufacturing uses as land area formerly occupied by those uses is transformed to combinations of retail, service, office, residential, and civic uses. 2. Classifications: The Urban Center North is divided into two zones: a. Urban Center -North 1 (UC-N1): This zone is anticipated to be the first to redevelop from airplane manufacturing and its accessory uses. The district is intended to attract new retail, office, and technology related uses that co-exist with continued airplane manufacturing in the short run, but provide a standard of development that stimulates further investment and transition of uses in the longer term. Large-scale retail uses are allowed as anchors, which, when combined with smaller pedestrian- oriented development, create a quality regional shopping center. Residential uses are allowed in a mixed use format to support the office/commercial mixed use center. The UC-N1 zone establishes a gateway to the overall UCN designation and provides transition to industrial uses located to the east and low-intensity residential and commercial areas to the south. b. Urban Center -North 2 (UC-N2): This zone allows continued airplane manufacturing and its accessory functions. Upon redevelopment, the UC-N2 zone is anticipated to become the core of the Urban Center -North. New development in the zone is anticipated to create distinctive urban residential neighborhoods, mixed use employment centers, and significant public open space and amenities. The UC-N2 zone is distinguished by redevelopment that will be sensitive to and take advantage of proximity to the urban shorelines along Lake Washington and the Cedar River. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 7 of 8 ----------------------------------------~ ..... (Ord. 3722, 4-25-1983; Ord. 4404, 6-7-1993; Ord. 4473, 9-12-1994; Ord. 4502, 3-13-1995; Ord. 4523, 6-5-1995; Ord. 4537,6-19-1995; Ord. 4614, 6-17-1996; Ord. 4631, 9-9-1996; Ord. 4649,1-6-1997; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4802,10- 25-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5027, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-020 leg.doc Page 8 of 8 3 4-2-020 PURPOSE AND INTE1~ f OF ZONING DISTRICTS to be amended by adding the following 4-2-020 PURPOSE AND INTENT OF ZONING DISTRICTS T. RESIDENTIAL-4 DU/ACRE (R-4): 1. Purpose: The Residential-4 Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-4) is established to promote urban single-family residential neighborhoods oflower density, serviceable by urban utilities and resulting in larger lot, higher quality. residential subdivisions. The Residential-4 Dwelling Units Per Acre Zone (R-4) will allow a maximum net density of four (4) dwelling units per acre. No minimum density is required. The R-4 designation serves as a transition between lower density rural designations and higher density more intense zones. It is intended as an intermediate lower density residential zone~ applied to Residential Low Density (RLD) areas of the City and, in paliicular, most of the East Renton Plateau. Traditional larger lot development is preferred, however, clustering is allowed on sites where sensitive areas or required buffers for wetlands and/or streams comprise at least thirty percent (30%) or more of the area and when resulting development is found to be superior in design and siting than that which otherwise would normally occur. 08/25/2004 H:\EONSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-020T.doc9: 19 AM DEVELOPMENT PLANNING .. CITY Of RENTON 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS AUG 2 6 2004· RECEIVED 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWD IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS: ZONING USE TABLE RESIDENTIAL ZONING INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS DESIGNATIONS USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-a RMH R- R-RM IL 1M IH CN GN CV CA CD CO COR UC- UC- 10 14 N1 N2 A. AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Agriculture P P Natural resource H H H H H H H H H H59 H H M H H H H H extraction/recovery B. ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Animal husbandry (20 or fewer P51 P51 P51 P51 P51 -small animals per acre) Animal husbandry (4 or fewer P51 P51 P51 P51 P51 -medium animals per acre) Animal husbandry (maximum P51 P51 P51 P51 P51 -of 1 large animal per acre) Greater number of animals than allowed above H36 H36 H36 H36 H36 - Beekeeping P35 P35 P35 P35 - Kennels AD37 P37 P37 P37 - Kennels, hobby AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 ~ AC37 AC37 AC37 AC37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per dwelling unit or AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AG AC AC AC AC AC AC AC business establishment USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-a RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN GN CV CA CD CO COR UC- UC- 10 14 N1 N2 L....-l....-L....---- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 1 of 10 <:- I 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS Stables, commercial AD37 AD37 C. RESIDENTIAL Detached dwelling P19 P19 P19 P19 P19 P19 P2G Detached dwelling (existing P P P legal) - Semi-attached dwelling P19 P19 P2G Attached dwellings pso pso P19 P18 P2G P73 P18 P16 P19 P74 P87 Flats or townhouses (existing P p P P73 legal) Flats or townhouses, no greater than 2 units total per P P P P P P P building (existing legal) Manufactured Homes -. - Manufactured homes P19 - Manufactured homes, P19 P19 P19 P19 P19 P19 P19 designated - Mobile homes P19 - (Amd. Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003) D. OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS Accessory dwelling unit AD7 - Adult family home P P P P P P P P P2G P P3 Caretaker's residence AC AC AC AC -AC AC AC AC Congregate residence AD P2G P P3 Group homes I -H H3 Group homes II for 6 or less P P P P P P P P P2G P P3 P Group homes II for 7 or more P H H H H H H H P2G P H H3 AD USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-8 RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN CN CV CA CD CO COR UC-UC- 10 14 N1 N2 Home occupations AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 ~ AC6 AC6 AC6 AC6 AC AC H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoni.ng._-I!l1plement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 2 of 10 -,) .. ~ 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS Retirement residences H H AD P P2G P P3 P39 P P75 P88 E. SCHOOLS K -12 educational institution H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H H H I4fl H9 H9 H9 H9 H9 H76 H89 (public or private) K-12 educational institution P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 P9 (public or private), existing Other higher education P38 P38 P38 -P P P P21 P H88 institution Schools/studios, arts and P P38 P38 ~ P22 P P P crafts Trade or vocational school P P H -H H77 F. PARKS Parks, neighborhood P p P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Parks, regional/community, p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p p P P P P eXisting Parks, regional/community, AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AG AD AD AD AD AD P P new G. OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES Community Facilities Cemetery H H H H H H H H H H H H FI H H H H H Religious institutions H H H H H H H H H H H H FI H H H H H H H90 Service and social H H H H H H H H H H H H FI H H H H12 H21 H78 H90 organizations Public Facilities City government offices AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AG AD AD AD P AD AD AD90 City government facilities H H H H H H H H H H H H FI H H H H H H H90 USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-8 RMH R- R-RM IL 1M IH CN CN CV CA CD CO COR UC- UC- 10 14 N1 N2 Jails, existing municipal -P Secure communitv transition H71 H71 - - --------------------- ----- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 3 of 10 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS facilities Other government offices and H H H H H H H H H H H H W H H H H H H H90 facilities H. OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Conference centers P38 P38 P38 -P38 P P P21 P P91 I Medical and dental offices P42 P38 P38 P38 AOO2 P22 P P P P P P92 Offices, general P42 P13 P13 P13 AD17 P22 P22 P P P P P P93 Veterinary offices/clinics P P42 P38 P38 P38 AOO2 P22 P P P38 P P78 I I. RETAIL Adult retail use P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 I I Big-box retail P P P -P20 P72 P79 I Drive-in/drive-through, retail AC AC AC AC AG AC AC AC28 AC78 AC80 I Eating and drinking P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 P1 H33 P42 P P P P22 P22 P22 P P P12 P27 P81 P94 I establishments Horticultural nurseries H H H H H H H H H H H H W H H H H H H Retail sales H33 AD P34 P34 P34 P60 Pes P22 P68 P P54 P21 P82 P95 Retail sales, outdoor P30 P30 P30 P-1S P15 P15 I P15 Taverns AQ AD P20 AD P21 P82 P99 • Vehicle sales, large P P P -P41 I Vehicle sales, small P P P -P20 I (Amd. Ord. 5001, 2-10-2003) J. ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment I Adult entertainment business P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 P43 USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-a RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN CN CV CA CD CO COR UC- UC- 10 14 N1 N2 Card room P52 P52 P52 -P52 Cultural facilities H H H H H H H H AD AD AD AD AQ AD AD AD AD AD AD AD90 Dance clubs P38 P38 P38 -AD22 P20 H P38 H ~~-.. ~ ~---~----L-______ ---- ----~ H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 4 of 10 .,.. "..:, 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS Dance halls P38 P38 P38 -AD22 P20 H P38 H Gaming/gambling facilities, H38 H29 H38 H2O H38 not-for-profit - Movie theaters P38 P38 P38 -P P20 P P12 P83 P94 Sports arenas, auditoriums, P38 P38 P38 P20 P P38 H H84 H96 exhibition halls, indoor - Sports arenas, auditoriums, P P38 P38 AD20 H H84 H96 exhibition halls, outdoor - Recreation Golf courses (existing) P P P P P -P Golf courses, new H P H H H -H Marinas P -P21 H97 Recreational facilities, indoor P33 P38 P38 P38 ~ P22 P P P65 P21 P78 P94 Recreational facilities, outdoor P33 P32 P32 P32 -H2O H38 H K. SERVICES Services, General Bed and breakfast house, AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD P -accessory Bed and breakfast house, AD AD AD5 AD P professional - Hotel P38 P38 P38 -P22 P20 P P38 P P P98 Motel P38 P38 P38 -P22 P20 Off-site services P42 P38 P38 P38 -P38 USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-8 RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN CN CV CA CD CO COR UC-UC- 10 14 N1 N2 On-site services H33 P42 P38 P38 P38 P63 peg P22 P69 P P54 P21 P78 P99 Drive-in/drive-through service AC62 AC62 AC62 AC AG AC AC AC70 AC61 AC61 AC78 AC80 Vehicle rental, small P P P A9 P20 Vehicle and equipment rental, P38 P29 P29 -large -,---.----~-'-'--- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 5 of 10 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS Day Care Services Adult day care I AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC P55 P55 P55 P22 ~ P22 P22 P P P P78 P100 Adult day care II H H H H H H H33 H AD AD H P22 ~ P22 P22 P P12 P21 P78 P100 I Day care centers H25 H25 H25 H25 H25 H25 H33 H25 P54 P54 P54 P22 ~ P22 P22 P P P21 P78 P100 Family day care home AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AG AC AC AC3 AC AC AC AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H H H H H ~ P22 H P3 P39 AD AD85 AD101, Medical institutions H H H H H H H H H56 H56 H56 H g H H H P40 H H H93 I L. VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Body shops P31 P31 P31 -P20 Car washes P P P AD2 ~ P22 P22 Express transportation ---i seNices AD P -AD22 AD20 I Fuel dealers H59 P - Industrial engine or , , transmission rebuild P31 P31 P31 - Parking garage, structured, P P P AOO2 P22 P20 P3 P P P P102 commercial or public . Parking, surface, commercial P38 P38 P38 AI;) P P20 P3 AD or public Railroad yards P - USES: RC R-1 R-S R-a RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN CN CV CA CD CO COR UC-UC- 10 14 N1 N2 Taxi stand -AD AD Tow truck operation/auto H59 P -impoundment yard Transit centers H38 H38 H38 -H2O P H38 P P103 Truck terminals P - Vehicle fueling stations P P P AD P P P P38 --.--L. ___ ----'-----_. -L-. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 6 of 10 ,. .. ~...., 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNA TIONS Vehicle service and repair, AD P P -large Vehicle service and repair, P P P AD2 ~ P P small Wrecking yard, auto H59 H - Air Transportation Uses Airplane manufacturing H59 -P Airplane manufacturing, AC -AC accessory functions Airplane sales and repair P - Helipads, accessory to primary H H38 H38 H2O H H H97 -use Helipads, commercial H -H97 Municipal airports -H M.STORAGE Hazardous material storage, on-site or off-site, including H24 H24 H24 - treatment Indoor storage P P P AC11 AG++ AC11 AC11 AC11 AC11 AC11 Outdoor storage P57 P57 P57 -AD64 P64 Self-service storage P8 P58 P59 P M2e H26 H26 Vehicle storage -AD38 USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-8 RMH R- R-RM IL 1M IH CN GN CV CA CD CO COR UC-UC- 10 14 N1 N2 Warehousing P P P - N. INDUSTRIAL Industrial, General Assembly and/or packaging P P P -P86 P104 operations Commercial laundries, existing P38 P38 P38 -P4 ---- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 7 of 10 4-2-060 WNING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS Commercial laundries, new P38 P38 P38 - Construction/contractor's office P14 P P - Laboratories: light P38 P38 P38 -P3 AD54 P P104 manufacturing Laboratories: research, P31 P P AD3 AD H P P104 development and testing - Manufacturing and fabrication, H59 P67 -P23 heavy Manufacturing and fabrication, P67 P67 -P23 medium Manufacturing and fabrication, -P light Solid Waste/Recycling Recycling collection and. P14 P38 P38 -P38 processing center Recycling collection station P P P P P P P P P P Sewage disposal and H59 H -treatment plants Waste recycling and transfer H59 p -facilities USES: RC R-1 R-5 R-a RMH R-R-RM IL 1M IH CN GN CV CA CD CO COR UC-UC- 10 14 N1 N2 O. UTILITIES Communication broadcast and H H H H H H H H relay towers H38 H29 H38 H H H H H H H Electrical power generation H66 H66 H66 H66 Hee H66 H66 H66 H66 H66 and cogeneration Utilities, small p p p p p p p P P P P P P P P P P P P p Utilities, medium AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AD AG AD AD AD AD AD AD AD Utilities, large H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H H . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA tJpdate\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 8 of 10 ~:. 4·2·060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS P. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support H48 AD47 AD47 AD47 H48 H48 H48 AD47 H48 AD47 H48 structures Macro facility antennas AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 AD46 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 PM P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 H H Micro facility antennas P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P AD AD Mini facility antennas P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P44 P P Minor modifications to existing wireless communication P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P4Q P49 P49 P49 P49 P49 P P facilities Monopole I support structures H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 H45 AD46 P44 P44 P44 AD46 AQ4.e P44 P44 AD46 P44 AD46 , Monopole II support structures H48 AD47 AD47 AD47 H48 H48 H48 AD47 H48 AD47 H48 Q. GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4·2· 050 and as defined in chapter 4·11 RMC, where AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AC AG AC AC AC AC AC AC AC not otherwise listed in Use Table R. TEMPORARY USES Model homes in an approved residential development: P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 one model home on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on· P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 Pea P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P10 P10 site Temporary or manufactured buildings used for P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 ~ P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 P10 construction Temporary uses P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 Pea P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 P53 -I Blank=Not Allowed P#=Permitted AD=Adm Inlstratlve AC=Accessory Use I ___ •• 1-1_-1 ___ -1: ... 1 _____ .... _ Conditional Use - ----------------------- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 9 of 10 4-2-060 ZONING USE TABLE -USES ALLOWED IN ZONING DESIGNATIONS P=Permltted Use I provided condition can be I H=Hearlng Examiner I #=Condition(s) I I I I met Conditional Use Uses may be further restricted by: RMC 4-3-020, Airport Related Height and Use Restriction; RMC 4-3-0S0C, Aquifer Protection Regulations; RMC 4-3-040C, Uses Permitted in the Automall Improvement Districts; RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Requirements (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Ord. 4802,10-25-1999; Ord. 4803, 10-25-1999; Ord. 4827,1-24-2000; Ord. 4840, 5-8-2000; Ord. 4857, 8-21-2000; Ord. 4915, 8-27-2001; Ord. 4917, 9-17-2001; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003; Ord. 5027, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-060.doc Page 10 of 10 • OEVELOPMEN" ANNtNG CITY OF RL. .•• 'ON AUG '2 6 2004. RECEIVED 4-2-070B.1 RESIDENTIAL-4 DUlAC (R-4) Uses allowed 'in the R-4 Zone are as follows: lJSES: AGRiCULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Natural resource extraction/recovery ANIMALS AND RELATED USES J::! Animal husbandry (20 or fewer small animals P #51 per acre) Animal husbandry (4 or fewer medium animals P #51 per acre) Animal husbandry (maximum of 1 large animal P #51 per acre) Greater number of animals than allowed above H #36 Beekeeping P #35 Kennels, hobby AC #37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per dwelling AC unit or business establishment RESIDENTIAL Detached dwelling Manufactured Homes Manufactured homes, designated OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME OCCUPATIONS Adult family home ..E Group homes II for 6 or less ..E Group homes II for 7 or more J::! Home occupations AC #6 SCHOOLS K-12 educational institution (public or private) H #9 K-12 educational institution (public or private), P #9 existing PARKS Parks, neighborhood ..E Parks, regional/community, existing ..E Parks, regional/community, new AD OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES Community Facilities Cemetery J::! Religious institutions J::! Service and social organizations J::! Public Facilities City government offices AD City government facilities J::! Other government offices and facilities J::! RETAIL Horticultural nurseries (existing) e Horticultural nurseries (new) J:! 4-2-0706.1 RESIDENTIAL-4 DUlAC (R-4) to be amended by adding the following ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment Cultural facilities Recreation Golf courses (new) Recreational facilities, indoor (existing) Recreational facilities, indoor (new) SERVICES Services, General Bed and breakfast house, accessory Day Care Services Adult day care I Adult day care II Day care centers Family day care Healthcare Services Medical institutions UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay towers Utilities, small Utilities, medium Utilities, large WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Macro facility antennas Micro facility antennas Mini facility antennas Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities Monopole I support structures GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, where not otherwise listed in the Use Table TEMPORARY USE Model homes in an approved residential development: one model home on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site Temporary or manufactured buildings used for construction Temporary uses iOrd. 4773, 3-22-JI)99; Amd. 0]"(1. 4963, 5-13-2(02) H J::! e ti J::! J::! ..E AD J::! H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updute\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-0708.1 R-4 (new)#2.doc Page I 2 4-2-070H RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM) Uses allowed in the RM Zone are as follows: 4-2-070H -RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM) to be amended by the following revisions. Interpretation of uses and project review in this designation shall be based on policy direction established in the Residential Multifamily Land Use Designation Objectives LU-JJ, LU-KK, and LU-LL. Policies LU-182 through LU-192, and the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. USES: TYPE: OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL HOME OCCUPATIONS RESOURCES Adult family home P Natural resource extractionlrecovery H Congregate residence AD Group homes II for 6 or less P ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Group homes" for 7 or more H Kennels, hobby AC#37 Home occupations AC#6 Pets, common household, up to 3 Retirement residences P per dwelling unit or business AC establishment SCHOOLS RESIDENTIAL K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 private) Detached dwelling (existing legal) P Attached dwelling P#19 K-12 educational institution (public or P#9 private), existing Flats or townhouses (existing legal) P Flats or townhouses, no greater than PARKS 2 units total per building (existing P legal) Parks, neighborhood P Parks, regional/community, existing P Parks, regional/community, new AD OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES RETAIL Eating and drinking establishments P #42 Community Facilities Cemetery H Horticultural nurseries H Religious institutions H Retail sales AD Service and social organizations H ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Entertainment OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC FACILITIES (Continued) Public Facilities Cultural facilities H City government offices AD City government facilities H SERVICES Other government offices and facilities H Services, General OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Bed and breakfast house, accessory AD Bed and breakfast house, professional AD #5 Medical and dental offices P #42 Off-site services P #42 Offices, general P #42 On-site services P #42 Veterinary offices/clinics P #42 Day Care Services Adult day care I AC Adult day care II H Day care centers H #25 Family day care AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H Medical institutions H STORAGE Self-service storage P#8 UTILITIES Communications broadcast and relay H towers Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H #48 Macro facility antennas P 4-2-070H -RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY (RM). to be amended by the following revisions. #44 Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P #44 Minor modifications to existing wireless P communication facilities #49 Monopole I support structures AD #46 Monopole II support structures H #48 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, AC where not otherwise listed in the Use Table TEMPORARY USE Model homes in an approved residential P development: one model home on an #53 existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P #53 Temporary or manufactured buildings P used for construction #10 Temporary uses P #53 (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773,3-22-1999; Ord. 4786,7-12-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4999,1-13-2003) 2 s 4-2-0701 COMMERCiAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) to be amended by adding the following revisions. 4-2-0701 CONVENIENCE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) Uses allowed in the GGCN Zone are as follows: Interpretation of uses and project review in this designation shall be based on policy direction established in the Neighborhood Commercial Land Use Designation Objective LU- WWW. Policies LU-422 through LU-430, and the purpose statement of the Neighborhood Commercial Land Use Designation. USES: TYPE: City government facilities AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL Other government offices and RESOURCES facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H OFFICE AND CONFERENCE ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Offices, general Kennels, hobby AC#37 RETAIL Pets, common household, up to 3 Drive-in/drive-through, retail per dwelling unit or business AC establishment Eating and drinking establishments Horticultural nurseries Retail sales RESIDENTIAL H H AD #17 AC P#22 H P 000 Detached dwelling (existing legal) P ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Attached dwelling P #18 Entertainment OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Cultural facilities AD HOME OCCUPATIONS Home occupations ACOO SERVICES Services, General SCHOOLS K-12 educational institution (public H or private) K-12 educational institution (public P#9 or private), existing Bed and breakfast house, accessory AD Bed and breakfast house, AD professional On-site services, excluding on-site P 003 d[Y cleaning and fitness centers Drive-in/drive-through service AC PARKS Parks, neighborhood P Day Care Services Parks, regional/community, existing P Adult day care I P#22 Parks, regional/community, new AD Adult day care II P#22 Day care centers P#22 OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC Family day care AC FACILITIES Healthcare Services Community Facilities Medical institutions H Cemetery H Religious institutions H VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Service and social organizations H Public Facilities Car washes, limited to operations AD #2 enclosed within a building Vehicle fueling stations AD City government offices AD Vehicle service and repair, small AD #2 STORAGE Indoor storage AC#11 INDUSTRIAL Solid Waste/Recycling Recycling collection station P UTILITIES Communications broadcast and H relay towers Electrical power generation and H#66 cogeneration Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 4-2-0701 COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) to be amended by adding the following revisions. Micro facility antennas P Mini facility antennas P #44 Minor modifications to eXisting P#49 wireless communication facilities Monopole I support structures AD #46 Monopole II support structures H#48 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as defined in chapter 4-11 AC RMC, where not otherwise listed in the Use Table TEMPORARY USE Model homes in an approved residential development: one P#53 model home on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 Temporary or manufactured P #10 buildings used for construction Temporary uses P#53 (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13- 2002; Ord. 4971,6-10-2002; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003) & .-----~ 4-2-070J CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) Uses allowed in the CN Zone are as follm'lS: ~ ~ AGRICYbTYRE AND NATYRAb RESOYRCES Nat!:Jral reso!:Jrse e*trastiontFesovery 1=1 -- ANIMAbS AND REbATED YSES Kennels, h099Y ~ Pets, sommon hot/sehoIEl, l;Ip to a per dwelling !:Jnit or 9l;1siness AG esta91ishment -- RESIDENTIAb [)etashe{;l d'A'eliing P-#2Q Semi aUashe{;l {;Iwelling P-#2Q AUashe{;l {;I'A'eliing P-#2Q Flats or to'A'nhol:lses (e*isting legal) p Flats or townhol;lses, no greater than 2 l:lnits total per 9l;1i1ding (existing p ~ -- OTHER RESIDENTIAb, bODGING AND HOME OCCYPATIONS A{;Il:llt family horne P-#2Q Congregate resieence P-#2Q Grol:lp homes II for fa or less P-#2Q Grol:lp homes II for 7 or more P-#2Q !=lome eccl:li3atiens ~ Retirement residences P-#2Q -- SCHOObS K 12 e{;ll:lcational institl;ltion (pl:l9Iic or 1=1-#9 f)rivate) K 12 e{;ll:lcational institl;ltion (Pl:l9Iic or P-#Q i3rivate), existing Schoolststl:l{;lios, arts an{;l crafts ~ -- PARKS ParKs, neigh90rhooEl p ParKs, regionalfcemml:lnity, existing p ParKs, regional.lcomm~:lRity, new A9 OTHER COMMYNIT¥ AND PYBblC FAClblTIES 4-2-070J -CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) to be amended by the following revisions GemmtlRity-Faef1i1fes - CemeteFY 1=1 Religiol:ls institl:ltions 1=1 SeFVice and social organiz:ations 1=1 PulJlie .t:aeilities - City goveFAment offices A9 City government facilities 1=1 Gther government offices and facilities 1=1 -- OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Me{;lical ane {;Iental offices ~ GUices, general ~ Veterinary officestclinics ~ -- RE:J:Alb Ael:llt retail l:lse FL#4a [)rive int{;lrive thro!:Jgh, retail AG Eating and erinKing esta91ishments ~ !=Ierticl;lltl:lral nl:lrseries 1=1 Retail sales P-#e8 Retail sales, ol:lt{;loor P-#4§ +averns A9 -- ENTERTAINMENf AND RECREATION ERteFlaiflffloot - Adl:llt entertainFRent 9l:lsiness FL#4a Cl:lltl:lral facilities A9 ReereaIieR - ResFeation facilities, indoor ~ -- SERVICES Se,<!',tfees, GeReF8I - Gn site servises P-#W Qrive in/drive throl:lgh sePt/ice AG Vehicle rental, sFRall A9 {)ay t;a,~ Serdees - AEll:llt day care I ~ ----------------------------------------~~ ...... A€ll:llt €lay safe " ~ gay safe seAtefs .~ Family €lay safe ' AG Healtheare 8eFAees - GeA'IalesseAt seRters ~ Me€lisal iRstill:ltieRs FI -- VEHICbE REbATED ACTIVITIES GaFwasAes ~ ParkiRg garage. stFl:lctl:lfed. cemmeFcial ~ eF ~1:l91ic PafkiRg. sl:lrface. cemmeFcial eF ~1:l91ic At) VeAisle fl:leliAg statieRs p VeAicle sePJice aR9 fe~air. small p -- S:r:ORAGE IAdeef stefage AG-#-14 Self sePJise stefage ~ -- INDUS:r:RIAb Selie-WastelReeyeliRg - RecycliAg cellectieR statieA p -- UTlbl:r:IES Gemml;misatieAs l3F9aecast aREI relay tewefs FI electrical selNer seReratieR aRe FI-#ee 4·2·070J -CENTER NEIGHBORHOOD (CN) to be amended by the following revisions cegeRefatieA Ylilities. small p Ytilities, medil:lm At) Ytilities. laFge FI -- 'AfIREbESS COMMUNICATION FAClbl:r:IES battise leweFs sl:l~~ert stFl:lstl:lFeS . FI-#48 MacFe facility aRteRRas P-#44 Micra facility aRteRAas p MiRi fasility aRteRRas P-#44 MiR9r meeificatieRs te e~dstiAg wireless P-#49 camml:lAicatiaR fasilities MEme~ele I sl:l~~ert stFl:letl:lfeS AQ.#4e MaRe~ele " SI:l~~9rt stfl:lctl:lres FI-#48 GENERAb ACCESSOR¥ USES Ascessary I:lses ~eF RMG 4 2 QaQ aRe as gefiRe9 iR sAa!'}teF 4 11 RMG, AG where Rat etheFwise Iiste9 iR the Yse +a9Ie -- TEMPORAR¥ USE Ma€lel h9mes iA aR a!,}!,}re'leEi FesieeRtial gel .. eI9~fReAt: aAe fRa€lel P--#aa heme 9R aR e*istiRg let SalestmaFketiRg trailers, 9A site P--#aa +eFfl!,}aFary 9F fRaRl:lfastl:lFee 9l:li!diRgS P-#W I:lseEi fer caRstrl:lstiaA +efR~afary I:lses P--#aa (Ofd. 4773. 3 221999; OF€l. 4777, 4 191999; OF€l. 4786, 7121999; OF9. 48Q3, 1Q 25 1999; OFe. 4827. 1 24 2QQQ; AfR€l. OF€l. 4963. a 13 2QQ2; OF9. 4999. 1 13 2QQ3) £ 4-2:'070K -CENTER VILLAGE (CY) to be amended by adding the following revisions 4-2-070K CENTER SUBURBAN (CS}VILLAGE (CV) Uses allowed in the CV Zone are as follows: Interpretation of uses and administration of conditional use permits shall be based on Objective LU-CCC, Policies LU-317 through LU-332, and the purpose statement of the Corridor Commercial Center Village Land Use Designation. USES: TYPE: FACILITIES AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Community Facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H Cemetery Religious institutions ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Service and social organizations Kennels, hobby AC#37 Public Facilities Pets, common household, up to 3 per City government offices dwelling unit or business AC establishment City government facilities Other government offices and facilities RESIDENTIAL OFFICE AND CONFERENCE QetacRed dwelliA€l P-#2Q Medical and dental offices Semi attacReEi ElwelliA€l P-#2Q Offices, general Attached dwelling P#+d Flats or townhouses (existing legal) P Veterinary offices/clinics Flats or townhouses, no greater than 2 units total per building (existing P RETAIL legal) Adult retail use Drive-in/drive-through, retail OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Eating and drinking establishments HOME OCCUPATIONS Horticultural nurseries Adult family home P#20 Retail sales Congregate residence P#20 Retail sales, outdoor Group homes II for 6 or less P#20 Taverns Group homes II for 7 or more P#20 Home occupations AC#6 ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Retirement residences P#20 Entertainment Adult entertainment business SCHOOLS Cultural facilities K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 private) Dance clubs K-12 educational institution (public or P#9 private), existing Dance halls Recreation Schools/studios, arts and crafts P#22 Recreation facilities, indoor PARKS SERVICES Parks, neighborhood P Parks, regional/community, existing P Services, General Parks, regional/community, new AD Hotel OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC Motel H H H AD H H P#22 P#22 P#22 P#43 AC P#22 H P#22 P#15 AD P#43 AD AD #22 AD #22 P#22 P#22 P#22 4·2·070K -CENTER VILLAGE (CV) to b d db d e amen e )y a ding the following revisions SERVICES (Continued) Recycling collection station P On-site services P#22 Drive-in/drive-through service AC UTILITIES Day Care Services Communications broadcast and relay H towers Adult day care I P#22 Adult day care II P#22 Electrical power generation and H#66 cogeneration Day care centers P#22 Utilities, small P Family day care AC Utilities, medium AD Healthcare Services Utilities, large H Convalescent centers P#22 WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Medical institutions H Lattice towers support structures H#48 Macro facility antennas P#44 VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Micro facility antennas P Car washes P#22 Mini facility antennas P#44 Express transportation services AD #22 Minor modifications to existing wireless communication facilities . P#49 Parking garage, structured, commercial P#22 or public Monopole I support structures P#44 Parking, surface, commercial or public P Monopole II support structures H#48 Vehicle fueling stations P Vehicle service and repair, small P GENERAL ACCESSORY USES Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and STORAGE as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, AC where not otherwise listed in the Use Indoor storage AC#11 Table Outdoor storage AD #64 TEMPORARY USE Self-service storage H#26 Model homes in an approved residential development: one model P#53 INDUSTRIAL home on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 Industrial, General Laboratories: light manufacturing AD #22 Temporary or manufactured buildings P#10 used for construction Solid Waste/Recycling Temporary uses P#53 (Ord. 4773,3-22-1999; Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Ord. 4786,7-12-1999; Ord. 4803,10-25-1999; Ord. 4827,1-24-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002; Ord. 4999,1-13-2003; Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003) & 4-2-070L -COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL (CA) to be amended by adding the following revisions. 4-2-070L COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL (CA) Uses allowed in the CA Zone are as follows: Interpretation of uses and administration of conditional use permits shall be based on policy direction established in the Corridor Commercial Land Use Designation, Objectives LU-DDD through LU-UUU, Policies LU-333 through LU-405, and purpose statement. USES: TYPE: Service and social organizations AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL Public Facilities RESOURCES Natural resource extraction/recovery H City government offices City government facilities ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Other government offices and facilities Kennels, hobby AC#37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per dwelling unit or business AC OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Conference center Medical and dental offices establishment Offices, general Veterinary offices/clinics RESIDENTIAL Attached dwelling P #18 RETAIL Flats or townhouses (existing legal) P#18 Adult retail use Big-box retail OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND Drive-in/drive-through, retail HOME OCCUPATIONS Eating and drinking establishments Group homes I H Horticultural nurseries Group homes II for 7 or more H Retail sales Home occupations AC #fj Retail sales, outdoor Taverns SCHOOLS Vehicle sales, large K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 private) Vehicle sales, small K-12 educational institution (public or P#9 private), existing ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Other higher education institution P Entertainment Schools/studios, arts and crafts P Adult entertainment business Trade or vocational school H Card room Cultural facilities PARKS Dance clubs Parks, neighborhood P Dance halls Parks, regional/community, existing P Gaming/gambling facilities, not-for- Parks, regional/community, new AD profit Movie theaters OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC Sports arenas, auditoriums, exhibition FACILITIES halls, indoor Community Facilities Sports arenas, auditoriums, exhibition halls, outdoor Cemetery H Recreation Religious institutions H Recreation facilities, indoor H AD H H P#38 P P P P#43 P#20 AC P H P#68 P#15 P#20 P#41 P#20 P#43 P#52 AD P#20 P#20 H#20 P#20 P#20 AD #20 P Recreation facilities, outdoor H#20 SERVICES Services, General Hotel P#20 Motel P#20 SERVICES (Continued) Off-site services P#38 On-site services P#69 Drive-in/drive-through service AC Vehicle rental, small P#20 Day Care Services Adult day care I P#22 Adult day care II P#22 Day care centers P#22 Family day care AC Healthcare Services Convalescent centers H Medical institutions H VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Body shops H #31 Car washes P#22 Express transportation services AD #20 Parking garage, structured, commercial P#20 or public Parking, surface, commercial or public P#20 Transit centers H #20 Vehicle fueling stations P Vehicle service and repair, small P Air Transportation Uses Helipads, accessory to primary use H#20 STORAGE Indoor storage AC#11 Outdoor storage P#64 Self-service storage H#26 Vehicle storage AD #38 INDUSTRIAL , Industrial, General 4-2-070L -COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL (CA) to be amended by adding the following revisions Laboratories: light manufacturing P#20 Laboratories: research, development P#20 and testing Manufacturing and fabrication, light H#20 INDUSTRIAL (Continued) Solid Waste/Recycling I Recycling collection station and P#38 processing center Recycling collection station p I UTILITIES I Communications broadcast and relay H towers Electrical power generation and H#66 cogeneration Utilities, small P Utilities, medium AD Utilities, large H I WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Lattice towers support structures AD #47 Macro facility antennas P#44 I Micro facility antennas p Mini facility antennas P#44 Minor modifications to existing wireless P#49· communication facilities Monopole I support structures P#44 Monopole II support structures AD #47 GENERAL ACCESSORY USES I Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, AC where not otherwise listed in the Use , Table TEMPORARY USE Model homes in an approved residential development: one model P#53 home on an existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P#53 Temporary or manufactured buildings P#10 used for construction Temporary uses P#53 (Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4786,7-12-1999; Ord. 4803,10-25-1999; Ord. 4827,1-24-2000; Ord. 4917,9-17-2001; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4999,1-13-2003) 4-2-0700 -COMMERCIAL OFFICE RESIDENTIAL (COR) to be amended by adding the following revisions. 4-2-0700 CENTER COMMERCIALlGF-F-ICE-OFFICE/RESIDENTIAL (COR) Uses allowed in the COR Zone are as follows: Interpretation of uses and project review in the designation shall be based on policy direction established in the Commercial/Office/Residential Objectives LU-WV, Policies LU-406 through LU-421, purpose statement, the Community Design, Housing and Environmental Elements of the Comprehensive Plan. USES: TYPE: FACILITIES AGRICULTURE AND NATURAL RESOURCES Community Facilities Natural resource extraction/recovery H Cemetery Religious institutions ANIMALS AND RELATED USES Service and social organizations Kennels, hobby AC#37 Pets, common household, up to 3 per Public Facilities dwelling unit or business AC City government offices establishment City government facilities Other government offices and facilities RESIDENTIAL OFFICE AND CONFERENCE Attached dwelling P #19 Conference center Medical and dental offices OTHER RESIDENTIAL, LODGING AND HOME Offices, general OCCUPATIONS Veterinary offices/clinics Group homes II for 6 or less P Grouphomes II for 7 or more AD RETAIL Home occupations . AC#6 Retirement residences P Big-box retail Eating and drinking establishments Horticultural nurseries SCHOOLS Retail sales K-12 educational institution (public or H#9 private) Taverns K-12 educational institution (public or P#9 private), existing ENTERTAINMENT AND RECREATION Other higher education institution P#21 Entertainment Cultural facilities PARKS Dance clubs Parks, neighborhood P Dance halls Parks, regional/community, existing P Recreation Parks, regional/community, new AD Golf courses (existing) OTHER COMMUNITY AND PUBLIC Golf courses (new) Marinas H H H #21 AD H H P#21 P P P P#72 P#27 H P #21 P#21 AD H H p H P #21 4-2-0700 -COMMERCIAL OFFICE RESIDENTIAL (COR) to be amended bv addina the following revisions. Recreation facilities, indoor P #21 Solid Waste/Recycling SERVICES Recycling collection station P Services, General UTILITIES Hotel P On-site services P#21 Communications broadcast and relay H' towers Drive-in/drive-through service AC#61 Electrical power generation and H#66 cogeneration Day Care Services Utilities, small p. Adult day care I P Utilities, medium AD Adult day care II P #21 Utilities, large H Day care centers P #21 Family day care AC WIRELESS COMMUNICATION FACILITIES Healthcare Services Lattice towers support structures H#48 Convalescent centers AD Macro facility antennas P #44 Medical institutions H Micro facility antennas P VEHICLE RELATED ACTIVITIES Mini facility antennas P#44 Parking garage, structured, commercial P or public Minor modifications to existing wireless P#49 communication facilities Air Transportation Uses , Monopole I support structures AD #46 Monopole II support structures H#48 Helipads, accessory to primary use H , GENERAL ACCESSORY USES STORAGE Accessory uses per RMC 4-2-050 and as Indoor storage AC #11 defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, where AC not otherwise listed in the Use Table INDUSTRIAL TEMPORARY USE Industrial, General Model homes in an approved residential development: one model home on an P#53 Laboratories: research, development and H testing existing lot Sales/marketing trailers, on-site P #53 Manufacturing and fabrication, heavy P#23 Manufacturing and fabrication, light P#23 Temporary or manufactured buildings ; used for construction P #10 Manufacturing and fabrication, medium P#23· ITemporary uses P#53 (Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Ord. 4802,10-25-1999; Ord. 4803, 10-25- 1999; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002; Ord. 4999,1-13-2003; Ord. 5001,2-10-2003) (!) z Zz ~~ !z~. wu. ::!EO g~ wo. > w 0 ~ Q w > (,Q -~ W (,!) 0 ::> W « a: 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-080 CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH ZONING USE TABLES: A. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Limited to locations within an existing or new golf course or regional park. 2. In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, the use must be sited in conjunction with a gas station. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN zone, limited to operations enclosed within a building. 3. These uses shall not be located on the ground floor along street frontage in the "Downtown Pedestrian District." See Downtown Pedestrian District Map in RMC 4-2-0800. 4. Existing commercial laundry uses may be continued and may be re- established for purposes of rebuilding upon unintentional destruction of property, Existing commercial laundry uses may not expand beyond their existing building footprint plus abutting easements, loading, or parking areas. Renovations or alterations within the existing building footprint are permitted. Existing commercial laundry uses may add to the height of buildings provided that the height of the building not exceed forty two feet (42'), and that additional height be used for accessory office to support the commercial laundry uses. Existing offsite warehousing uses accessory to existing commercial laundry uses may be continued but may not be expanded beyond their existing building footprint. 5. Professional bed and breakfast houses are only allowed in the RM-U Zone. 6. Subject to the requirements of RMC 4-9-090, Home Occupations, with the written approval of the property owner, if tenant occupied. 7. Subject to the development standards applicable to primary structures. 8. Allowed only in the Residential Multi-Family Infill suffix. Twenty four (24) hour on-site management required. The manager's unit is not subject to minimum density requirements. No estate, garage or other sales from any leasable spaces. No outdoor storage, including vehicle or trailer storage lots. Self service storage uses in this zone are subject to the following special development standards: Temporary customer moving van/truck parking, if provided, must be clearly marked with signage or paint. Side and rear setbacks subject to the Commercial Arterial Zone standards of RMC 4-2-120A, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations, in lieu of the RM-I development standards. 9. Development consistent with an approved "Master Plan" is considered to be a permitted use. Other activities which are outright permitted include the addition of up to four (4) new portables, or changes in facilities not exceeding ten percent (10%) of gross floor area. Other proposed activities require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 10. Permitted when approved by the Development Services Division and associated with an active building or construction permit, for a period not to exceed the duration of construction. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 11. Limited to storage of products in conjunction with retail, service, or office uses. Shall not be located along the building street frontage or in areas visible to the public. 12. Shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 13. a. Administrative Headquarters Office: These offices shall be associated with a permitted industrial use listed in RMC 4-2-0601. The office uses may be developed in conjunction with, or subsequent to, the industrial use. b. General Offices: Excluding administrative headquarters offices, which are permitted consistent with subsection (13)(a) of this Section, general offices are only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation; provided that general offices that are accessory to a primary use are permitted outside the EAV. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 14. Except that when operations are predominantly conducted Ot:H-out-ef..of-doors rather than completely enclosed within an enclosed structure, an administrative conditional use permit is required.,.in the Sunset Corridor. NE 4th Corridor-,and Center Village. 15. Use is limited to building, hardware, and garden. Except in the CD Zone, size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A. 16. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Residential uses shall not be located along the street frontage on the ground floor in the "Downtown Pedestrian District." 17. a. General Office: Size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A. Additionally, the use may only be permitted via administrative conditional use permit subject to the following criteria in addition to conditional use criteria: (i) activities with a limited need for walk-in clientele and (ii) activities for which a reduction in parking standards to one space per five hundred (500) square feet of gross floor space could be justified. b. Administrative Headquarters Office: New administrative headquarters offices are not permitted. For existing, legal administrative headquarters offices greater than three thousand (3,000) square feet in size, and in existence prior to January 1, 1999, the following expansions may be allowed: (i) parking expansion may be allowed; Oi) a one-time expansion of building square footage, not exceeding three thousand five hundred (3,500) square feet, may be permitted subject to site development plan review. This provision allowing expansion of building square footage shall expire on December 1, 2006, consistent with any approved development agreements or covenants. 18. a. General Requirements: Subject to the density limits of the development standards for this zone. Only permitted within a structure containing retail and/or on-site service uses on the ground floor.,...in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor and CN Zone. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc · , 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions b. CA Zone -Additional: Residential uses are not permitted in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 19. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. 20. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Projects witRin the Suburban and Neighborhood Center Residential Bonus District, RMC 4 3 095133, are also subject to the provisions and development standards in RMC 4 3 095C and D, Suburban anG-NeighborhooEl--GeRter Residential-Benus District. Limited to the Rainier Corridor from south Second Street to Houser Way. 21. a. General Requirements: Allowed only in conjunction with offices, residences, hotels, and convention centers, or research and development facilities. b. Integration of Uses: The use shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the development. Except for marinas, the use must be housed in a structure containing one or more of the uses listed in subsection (21 )(a) of this Section. The requirements in subsection (21 )(b) may be adjusted through the Master Plan process. 22. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN zone. fast food establishments are prohibited. 23. Limited to existing uses. Only those modifications or expansions which do not increase production levels are permitted in COR 1 and COR 2. Major mqdifications, production increases, or expansions of existing use require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in COR 1 or COR 2. No modifications or expansions are allowed in COR 3. 24. Use requires a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit, unless accessory in which case it is outright permitted. Use is not permissible in the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street, unless accessory, in which case it is outright permitted. Explosives and natural gas storage are not permissible in the IL Zone. 25. A preschool or day care center, when accessory to a public or community facility listed in RMC 4-2-060J, is considered a permitted use. 26. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. Must be part of a mixed use development. 27. Shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the overall development. Freestanding establishments may be permitted only if they are five thousand (5,000) square feet or larger per establishment. These requirements may be adjusted through the Master Plan review process. 28. Accessory drive-through service is permitted only in association with multi- story buildings. The accessory drive-through service shall be located to the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc \ 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions side and/or rear of the building, and integrated into the exterior wall. Drive- through lanes shall not be located between the street and the main pedestrian access to the buildings. These requirements may be adjusted through the Site Plan review process. 29. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. Provided that the use is excluded within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 30. a. Uses are limited to: Sales of mobile or manufactured homes, building/hardware/garden materials, lumberyards, and monuments/tombstones/gravestones. b. Location Restrictions: . i. Building/hardware/garden sales and monuments/tombstones/gravestones sales are only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. However, they are excluded from the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. ii. Lumberyards are only allowed in the 1M and IH Zones. However, they are excluded from the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 31. Operations must be conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. 32. Outdoor recreation facilities are permitted only in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV map in RMC 4-2-080B.) However, amusement parks require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 33. Indoor or outdoor recreational facilities and/or eating and drinking establishments, mini-marts, laundromats, day care centers, or adult day care II uses are permitted only in conjunction with and intended to serve residential development in the R-14 Zone. Project size limitations of RMC 4-2-110F apply. A preschool or day care center, when accessory to public or community facilities listed in RMC 4-2-060J, is considered a permitted use. 34. a. Accessory retail uses are permitted where ordinarily incidental to the permitted principal use. b. Principal retail sales uses are only permitted in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 35. Provided hives are established on lots a minimum of one acre in size. Setbacks and other limitations apply per RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. 36. A greater number of animals per acre than are otherwise allowed in this zone may be permitted by the Hearing Examiner; provided: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions a. The keeping of animals must meet the conditions of RMC 4-4-010F, General Requirements for Keeping Animals; and b. A farm management plan has been adopted based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation and Practice Standards showing that adequate pasturage to support a larger number of animals is provided. 37. a. General Requirements: Subject to requirements of RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. Hobby Kennels require a Hobby Kennel License per RMC 4-9-100. b. IL Zone -Kennels: In the IL Zone, when operations are predominantly conducted out of doors rather than completely enclosed within an enclosed structure, an administrative conditional use permit is required. c. 1M Zone -Kennels and Hobby Kennels: Within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street only indoor kennels or indoor hobby kennels are permitted. 38. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 39. Requirements for uses not associated with a medical institution: Use must be located within the Center Institution (CI) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. 40. Permitted when located within the Center Institution (CI) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. 41. Limited to the area south of 1-405 and west of SR-167/Rainier Avenue S. 42. Permitted only on the ground-floor level as part of a residential project on RM-U zoned properties fronting on South 7th Street. (Amd. Ord. 4971, 6- 10-2002) 43. Subject to the provisions of RMC 4-3-010, Adult Retail and Entertainment Regulations, and chapter 5-12 RMC, Adult Entertainment Standards. In the CO zone, uses shall be developed as part of larger office structures, shall not stand alone, and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 44. In the NE 4th Street Corridor and Rainier Corridor, pPermitted provided that the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel, otherwise an administrative conditional use permit is required. 45. May be allowed via a Hearing Examiner conditional use provided that the site is over one acre in size and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel; otherwise the use is prohibited. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 46. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, e€ligible for an administrative conditional use permit provided that the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100/) from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel, otherwise a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit is required. 47. In the Rainier Avenue Corridor, mMay be allowed by an administrative conditional use permit if the monopole II facility is to be constructed on property where wireless communication support structures presently operate, and the new monopole II facility will not exceed the height of the existing support structures. Prohibited if located within three hundred feet (300/) of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone unless the Development Services Division determines that all residentially zoned property within three hundred feet (300/) of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to critical areas regulations (RMC 4-3-050), then the new wireless support structure can be reviewed as an administrative conditional use. 48. In the NE 4th Corridor and Sunset Corridor, pProhibited if located within three hundred feet (300/) of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone, otherwise may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 49. Whether emergency or routine, so long as there is little or no change in the visual appearance, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 50. a. General Requirements: Permitted subject to the applicable density limitations, building length, and dwelling unit type mix requirements of the development standards for this zone. b. R-10 Zone: Limited to no more than four (4) attached dwellings per building. c. R-14 Zone: Buildings shall not exceed six (6) dwelling units per structure except as provided in RMC 4-9-0650, Bonuses. 51. a. General Requirements: No animals are allowed on lots less than one acre in size. Animal husbandry uses are subject to the standards listed in RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. Only combinations of medium and small animals or large and small animals may be permitted outright on one acre, provided that the overall total of animals is' consistent with the requirements per acre (for example, twenty (20) small animals plus four (4) medium animals). b. R-8 and R-10 Zones -Small Animals: Only six (6) or fewer small animals per acre are permitted. c. R-8 and R-10 Zones -Large Animals: Large animals are permitted on lots four (4) acres or greater in size. Only one large animal per two (2) acres is permitted. 52. Permitted when ancillary to a permitted use where food and beverages are served on the premises and located in an area with an Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, and located south of 1-405. In the case of the 1M H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions Zone, the location is further limited to 1M-zoned areas south of SW 16th Street. Should any court of competent jurisdiction find that the City zoning for card rooms is unconstitutional or illegal, then the City elects to permit the existing card rooms to continue operation as nonconforming legal uses and otherwise bans card rooms. 53. Provided a temporary use permit is obtained consistent with the provisions of RMC 4-9-240, Temporary Use Permits. 54. Allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808.) Outside the EAV, the use shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Such uses shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 55. a. Adult day care Ion a property with a nonresidential facility is only allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV). See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808. Outside of the EAV, an administrative conditional use permit is required. b. Adult day care I on a property containing a residential use requires an administrative conditional use permit in any location. 56. Except not permissible within the Employment Area Valley (EAV). (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808.) 57. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation, unless the use is accessory in which case it is allowed outside the EAV. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808. 58. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808. Outside of the EAV, use is allowed as an administrative conditional use. 59. Excluded within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 60. Subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. Retail sales uses are limited to: flowers/plants and floral supplies; mini-marts; newsstands; en-teftafRfReRt-ffiedla-sale&:crafts including supplies and finished products. gift shopps. speciality markets. 61. No drive-through service shall be permitted, except for financial institutions which are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows that shall be part of the exterior wall of the financial institution structure. 62. Outside the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation (see EAV Map in RMC 4-2-0808), drive-through is permitted only when accessory to a financial institution. Financial institutions are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows that shall be part of the exterior wall of the financial institution structure. Within the EAV, drive-through service is permitted. 63. Subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. On-site services excluding drycleaning. real estate offices. and fitness centers. Instructional studios H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions limited to locations on a primary arterial with transit service.are limited to tAe-foIlewing: barber/beauty shops; laundromats; repair serv-iGesr eAteftafnment media remah 64. Limited to storage in association with rental services. In the Cy'S Zone and in the NE 4th Street Corridor, an administrative conditional use permit is required. Not allowed in the Sunset Cooridor. Size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A7~ 65. Allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B.) Outside the EAV, the use is limited to health clubs/fitness centers/sports clubs, which shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Such uses shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) of anyone floor of a building whose primary use is office .. 66. Requires a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit, except that electrical power generation and co-generation is permitted as an accessory use when located more than one hundred feet (100') from any property zoned for residential use, i.e. RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14, RM, and producing less than ten (10) megawatts of electricity. In the CO Zone, the use must be accessory to a medical institution. 67. Chemical and allied products manufacturing operations, or operations which are conducted predominantly out of doors, require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the 1M Zone, and an administrative conditional use permit in the IH Zone, except that these uses are not permisSible in the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. , 68. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, uYses are subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. The following retail sale uses are not permitted: department stores; jewelry stores; office supply stores; pet shops and pet grooming. 69. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, uYses are subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. Only the following on-site service uses are permitted: a. Financial and real estate services; repair services, excluding jewelry; entertainment media rental; b. Rental services not otherwise listed in subsection (69)(a) of this Section require an administrative· conditional use permit. 70. No drive-through service shall be permitted, except for multi-story financial institutions which are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows. The accessory drive-through service shall be located to the side and/or rear of the building, and the windows shall be part of the exterior wall. Drive- through lanes shall not be located between the street and the main pedestrian access to the buildings. These requirements may be adjusted through the Site Plan review process. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc J 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions 71. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation south of 1-405 subject to a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. No secure community transition facility (SCTF) shall: a. House more than six persons, excluding resident staff. Any increase in the number of resident beds shall require an entirely new application. b. Be allowed within three hundred thirty feet (330') of any residential zone located within or outside the City limits. c. Be allowed adjacent to, abutting, across a parking lot from, or within the "line of sight" from a "risk potential activity" as defined in RCW 71.09.020, now or as hereafter amended, or risk potential facilities in existence at the time a site is listed for consideration. For the purposes of granting a Conditional Use Permit for siting an SCTF, the Reviewing Official shall consider a permanent, unobstructed visual distance of six hundred feet (600') to be within "line of sight." The Reviewing Official may reduce the distance to less than six hundred feet (600') through the Conditional Use Permit process, if the applicant can demonstrate that a visual barrier exists or can be created that would reduce the line of sight to less than six hundred feet (600'). Risk potential facilities currently include, but are not limited to: Community and recreation centers, Churches, synagogues, temples and mosques, Licensed day care, Licensed preschool facilities, Public libraries, Public parks, Public and private schools, School bus stops, Sports fields, or Publicly dedicated trails. d. Be located within one mile from any SCTF, work release, prerelease, or similar facility. Note: "Distance" referenced in paragraphs b, c, and d of this section is measured by following a straight line from the nearest point of the building in which the secure community treatment facility is to be located, to the nearest H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions point of the zoning boundary line or property line of the lot on which the buffered use is located. The City may impose conditions to mitigate any potential adverse impact of the SCTF on surrounding uses, except that the Conditional Use Permit conditions may not impose restrictions on the SCTF greater than those set forth in RCW 71.09.285 through 71.09.340 inclusive. 72. Big-box retail to be permitted in the COR 3 Zone, east of Garden Avenue North and north of N. 8th Street. 73. Within the Center Village Zone, Residential Bonus District, "residential only uses" are limited to townhouse development in the range of 7-20 dwelling units per acre. Garden style apartments are prohibited. Flats or townhouses, when in a mixed-use structure that combines residential with first floor commercial uses. Projects within the Center Village are also subject to the provisions and development standards in RMC 43-095 C and D, Center Village Residential Bonus District. a. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Projects "'lith in the Suburban and Neighborhood Center Residential Bonus District, RMC 4 3 095B3, are also subject to the previsions and development standards in RMC 4 3 095C and D, Suburban and Ne-ighborhood--Ge-nter Residential Bonus District. l:h Within the Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation, 8attached dwelling unit developments in the range of ten (10) to twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre may only be townhouse unit types. 74. a. Flats permitted only north of N. 8th Street unless part of a mixed use structure with ground-floor commercial. Flats are permitted with a maximum density of eighty five (85) d.u./net acre. All residential parking except that intended for guests is required to be located in structured parking. A bonus of up to one hundred fifty (150) d.u./net acre permitted for flats in a mixed use structure with ground-floor commercial uses within them. b. Townhouses: Parking is required to be provided under a structure. A maximum height of three stories is allowed for townhouses. Minimum density of twenty (20) d.u./net acre permitted and maximum of twenty five (25) d.u./net acre pefmitted. 75. Only permitted west of Park Ave'. and south of N. 8th Street. 76. Only Grades 9 through 12 permitted. 77. a. Only permitted north of N. 8th Street and as part of a mixed use structure. b. Limited to training related to research and development, arts, computer sciences, business, culinary arts, medical-related fields and/or other knowledge-based industries. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc ) 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 78. No freestanding structures permitted unless architecturally and functionally integrated into an overall shopping center or mixed use development. 79. a. Must function as an anchor to larger retail developments that are planned as part of an integrated and cohesive center. b. Big-box use must be connected to additional structures within a shopping center with supporting retail or service uses structures with common walls, or plazas, or other similar features, excluding pushcarts/kiosks. c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 80. Drive-through windows must abut a building facade or wall and must be located within the building footprint. 81. No stand-alone structures smaller than five thousand (5,000) square feet, except for pushcarts/kiosks, unless architecturally and functionally integrated into a shopping center or mixed use development. 82. a. Multi-story, stand-alone retail buildings greater than seventy five thousand (75,000) square feet are allowed only with structured parking and a maximum building footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square feet. b. No freestanding structures smaller than five thousand (5,000) square feet are permitted, unless architecturally and functionally integrated into overall shopping center or mixed use development. c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 83. a. Movie facilities with more than four (4) screens must be architecturally and functionally integrated into overall shopping center or mixed use development. b. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 84. Permitted subject to the conditional use criteria regarding airport compatibility located in RMC 4-3-020. 85. Only permitted south of N. 8th Street. 86. Limited to airplane manufacturing, biotechnology, life science, information technology (Le., hardware, software, computer components), or other high technology industry. 87. a. Attached Dwelling Units, General: Not allowed within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. Permitted as mixed use structures with ground-floor commercial except that parcels may be developed exclusively for attached dwelling units if: L The entire frontage of the block is residential, H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions ii. Support facilities such as exercise facilities, lobbies, etc., face the street frontage and living areas are in the rear, or iii. Entries to attached dwelling units are slightly elevated above the sidewalk level. b. Stacked Flats: In addition to required provisions of attached dwelling units, general, above, the following provisions are required: i. Structured parking is required north of N. 8th Street. ii. South of N. 8th Street, only guest parking may be provided as surface parking. iii. A minimum of twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre are required. c. Townhouses: In addition to required provisions of attached dwelling units, general, above, ,a minimum density of twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre is required. 88. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking is required north of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 89. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. 90. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 91. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. If located north of N. 8th Street, then must be located in a mixed use structure. d. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets, must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 92. a. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. b. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. c. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 93. a. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions b. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 94. a. Must be located within a mixed use structure. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 95. a. Multi-story, stand-alone retail buildings greater than seventy five thousand (75,000) square feet are allowed only with structured parking and a maximum building footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square feet. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 96. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. Beyond one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of the Renton Municipal Airport runway, this use is allowed subject to the conditional use criteria regarding airport compatibility located at RMC 4-3-020. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 97. The use shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into a larger mixed use development. 98. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking is required. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 99. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 100. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 101. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Permitted only south of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 102. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 103. Structured parking is required. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 104. a. Limited to airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, biotechnology, life science, information technology (Le., hardware, software, computer components), or other high technology industry. b. For uses other than airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. For uses other than airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. (Ord. 4186,11-14-1988; Ord. 4404, 6-7-1993; Ord. 4432,12-20-1993; Ord. 4466, 8-22-1994; Ord. 4631, 9-9-1996; Ord. 4736,8-24-1998; Ord. 4773,3-22-1999; Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Ord. 4802,10-25-1999; Ord. 4803, 10-25-1999; Ord. 4827,1-24-2000; Ord. 4840,5-8-2000; Ord. 4847,6-19-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002; Ord. 5001, 2-10-2003; Ord. 5018,9-22-2003; Ord. 5027, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc \" 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-080 CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH ZONING USE TABLES: A. SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Limited to locations within an existing or new golf course or regional park. 2. In addition to the criteria of RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, the use must be sited in conjunction with a gas station. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN zone, limited to operations enclosed within a building. 3. These uses shall not be located on the ground floor along street frontage in the "Downtown Pedestrian District." See Downtown Pedestrian District Map in RMC 4-2-080D. 4. Existing commercial laundry uses may be continued and may be re- established for purposes of rebuilding upon unintentional destruction of property. Existing commercial laundry uses may not expand beyond their existing building footprint plus abutting easements, loading, or parking areas. Renovations or alterations within the existing building footprint are permitted. Existing commercial laundry uses may add to the height of buildings provided that the height of the building not exceed forty two feet (42'), and that additional height be used for accessory office to support the commercial laundry uses. Existing offsite warehousing uses accessory to existing commercial laundry uses may be continued but may not be expanded beyond their existing building footprint. 5. Professional bed and breakfast houses are only allowed in the RM-U Zone. 6. Subject to the requirements of RMC 4-9-090, Home Occupations, with the written approval of the property owner, if tenant occupied. 7. Subject to the development standards applicable to primary structures. 8. Allowed only in the Residential Multi-Family Infill suffix. Twenty four (24) hour on-site management required. The manager's unit is not subject to minimum density requirements. No estate, garage or other sales from any leasable spaces. No outdoor storage, including vehicle or trailer storage lots. Self service storage uses in this zone are subject to the following special development standards: Temporary customer moving van/truck parking, if provided, must be clearly marked with signage or paint. Side and rear setbacks subject to the Commercial Arterial Zone standards of RMC 4-2-120A, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning DeSignations, in lieu of the RM-I development standards. 9. Development consistent with an approved "Master Plan" is considered to be a permitted use. Other activities which are outright permitted include the addition of up to four (4) new portables, or changes in facilities not exceeding ten percent (10%) of gross floor area. Other proposed activities require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 10. Permitted when approved by the Development Services Division and associated with an active building or construction permit, for a period not to exceed the duration of construction. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions 11. Limited to storage of products in conjunction with retail, service, or office uses. Shall not be located along the building street frontage or in areas visible to the public. 12. Shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 13. a. Administrative Headquarters Office: These offices shall be associated with a permitted industrial use listed in RMC 4-2-0601. The office uses may be developed in conjunction with, or subsequent to, the industrial use. b. General Offices: Excluding administrative headquarters offices, which are permitted consistent with subsection (13}(a) of this Section, general offices are only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation; provided that general offices that are accessory to a primary use are permitted outside the EAV. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 14. Except that when operations are predominantly conducted el:It-out-Gf-of-doors· rather than completely enclosed within an enclosed structure, an administrative conditional use permit is required.,.in the Sunset Corridor, NE 4th Corridor-,and Center Village. 15. Use is limited to building, hardware, and garden. Except in the CD Zone, size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A. ' 16. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Residential uses shall not be located along the street frontage on the ground floor in the "Downtown Pedestrian District." 17. a. General Office: Size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A. Additionally, the use may only be permitted via administrative conditional use permit subject to the following criteria in addition to conditional use criteria: (i) activities with a limited need for walk-in clientele and (ii) activities for which a reduction in parking standards to one space per five hundred (500) square feet of gross floor space could be justified. b. Administrative Headquaners Office: New administrative headquarters offices are not permitted. For existing, legal administrative headquarters offices greater than three thousand (3,000) square feet in size, and in existence prior to January 1, 1999, the following expansions may be allowed: (i) parking expansion may be allowed; (ii) a one-time expansion of building square footage, not exceeding three thousand five hundred (3,500) square feet, may be permitted subject to site development plan review. This provision allowing expansion of building square footage shall expire on December 1, 2006, consistent with any approved development agreements or covenants. 18. a. General Requirements: Subject to the density limits of the development standards for this zone. Only permitted within a structure containing retail and/or on-site service uses on the ground floor.,...in the Rainier Avenue Business Corridor and CN Zone. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc ' 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions b. CA Zone -Additional: Residential uses are not permitted in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 19. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. 20. Subject to the density limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Projects within the Suburban and ~Jeighborhood Center Residential Bonus District, RMC 4 3 095B3, are also subject to the provisions and development standards in RMC 4 3 095C and D, Suburban and Neighborhood Center Residential Bonus District. Limited to the Rainier Corridor from south Second Street to Houser Way. 21. a. General Requirements: Allowed only in conjunction with offices, residences, hotels, and convention centers, or research and development facilities. b. Integration of Uses: The use shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the development. Except for marinas, the use must be housed in a structure containing one or more of the uses listed in subsection (21 )(a) of this Section. The requirements in subsection (21)(b) may be adjusted through the Master Plan process. 22. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. In the CN zone, fast food establishments are prohibited. 23. Limited to existing uses. Only those modifications or expansions which do not increase production levels are permitted in COR 1 and COR 2. Major modifications, production increases, or expansions of existing use require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in COR 1 or COR 2. No modifications or expansions are allowed in COR 3. 24. Use requires a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit, unless accessory in which case it is outright permitted. Use is not permissible in the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street, unless accessory, in which case it is outright permitted. Explosives and natural gas storage are not permissible in the IL Zone. 25. A preschool or day care center, when accessory to a public or community facility listed in RMC 4-2-060J, is considered a permitted use. 26. Size restrictions apply per use in RMC 4-2-120A. Must be part of a mixed use development. 27. Shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into the overall development. Freestanding establishments may be permitted only if they are five thousand (5,000) square feet or larger per establishment. These requirements may be adjusted through the Master Plan review process. 28. Accessory drive-through service is permitted only in association with multi- story buildings. The accessory drive-through service shall be located to the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions side and/or rear of the bUilding, and integrated into the exterior wall. Drive- through lanes shall not be located between the street and the main pedestrian access to the buildings. These requirements may be adjusted through the Site Plan review process. 29. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. Provided that the use is excluded within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 30. a. Uses are limited to: Sales of mobile or manufactured homes, building/hardware/garden materials, lumberyards, and monuments/tombstones/gravestones. b. Location Restrictions: i. Building/hardware/garden sales and monuments/tombstones/gravestones sales are only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. However, they are excluded from the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. ii. Lumberyards are only allowed in the 1M and IH Zones. However, they are excluded from the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 31. Operations must be conducted entirely within an enclosed structure. 32. Outdoor recreation facilities are permitted only in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV map in RMC 4-2-080B.) However, amusement parks require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 33. Indoor or outdoor recreational facilities and/or eating and drinking establishments, mini-marts, laundromats, day care centers, or adult day care II uses are permitted only in conjunction with and intended to serve residential development in the R-14 Zone. Project size limitations of RMC 4-2-110F apply. A preschool or day care center, when accessory to public or community facilities listed il1 RMC 4-2-060J, is considered a permitted use. 34. a. Accessory retail uses are permitted where ordinarily incidental to the permitted principal use. b. PrinCipal retail sales uses are only permitted in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 35. provided hives are established on lots a minimum of one acre in size. Setbacks and other limitations apply per RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. 36. A greater number of animals per Clcre than are otherwise allowed in this zone may be permitted by the Hearing Examiner; provided: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions a. The keeping of animals must meet the conditions of RMC 4-4-01 OF, General Requirements for Keeping Animals; and b. A farm management plan has been adopted based on the King County Conservation District's Farm Conservation and Practice Standards showing that adequate pasturage to support a larger number of animals is provided. 37. a. General Requirements: Subject to requirements of RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. Hobby Kennels require a Hobby Kennel License per RMC 4-9-100. b. IL Zone -Kennels: In the IL Zone, when operations are predominantly conducted out of doors rather than completely enclosed within an enclosed structure, an administrative conditional use permit is required. c. 1M Zone -Kennels and Hobby Kennels: Within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street only indoor kennels or indoor hobby kennels are permitted. 38. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 39. Requirements for uses not associated with a medical institution: Use must be located within the Center Institution (CI) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. 40. Permitted when located within the Center Institution (CI) Comprehensive Plan land use designation. 41. Limited to the area south of 1-405 and west of SR-167/Rainier Avenue S. 42. Permitted only on the ground-floor level as part of a residential project on RM-U zoned properties fronting on South 7th Street. (Amd. Ord. 4971, 6- 10-2002) 43. Subject to the provisions of RMC 4-3-010, Adult Retail and Entertainment Regulations, and chapter 5-12 RMC, Adult Entertainment Standards. In the CO zone, uses shall be developed as part of larger office structures, shall not stand alone, and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 44. In the NE 4th Street Corridor and Rainier Corridor, pPermitted provided that the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel, otherwise an administrative conditional use permit is required. 45. May be allowed via a Hearing Examiner conditional use provided that the site is over one acre in size and the facility has minimum setbacks of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel; otherwise the us~ is prohibited. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 46. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, e~ligible for an administrative conditional use permit provided that the facility has a minimum setback of one hundred feet (100') from any adjacent residentially zoned parcel, otherwise a Hearing Examiner conditi~nal use permit is required. 47. In the Rainier Avenue Corridor, mMay be allowed by an administrative conditional use permit if the monopole II facility is to be constructed on property where wireless communication support structures presently operate, and the new monopole" facility will not exceed the height of the existing support structures. Prohibited if located within three hundred feet (300') of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone unless the Development Services Division determines that all residentially zoned property within three hundred feet (300') of the proposed facility is undevelopable due to critic?1 areas regulations (RMC 4-3-050), then the new wireless support structure can be reviewed as an administrative condWonaluse. ' 48. In the NE 4th Corridor and Sunset Corridor, pProhibited if located within three hundred feet (300') of an RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, or R-14 Zone, otherwise may be allowed with a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. 49. Whether emergency or routine, so long as there is little or no change in the visual appearance, as determined by the Zoning Administrator. 50. a. General Requirements: Permitted subject to the applicable density limitations, building length, and dwelling unit type mix requirements of the development standards for this zone. b. R-10 Zone: Limited to no more than four (4) attached dwellings per building. c. R-14 Zone: Buildings shall not exceed six (6) dwelling units per structure except as provided in RMC 4-9-0650, Boruses. 51. a. General Requirements: No animals are allowed on lots less than one acre in size. Animal husbandry uses are subject to the standards listed in RMC 4-4-010, Standards and Review Criteria for Keeping Animals. Only combinations of medium and small animals or large and small animals may be permittec,l outright on one acre, provided that the overall total of animals is consistent with the requirements per acre (for example, twenty (20) small animals plus four (4) medium animals). b. R-8 and R-10 Zones -Small Animals: Only six (6) or fewer small animals per acre are permitted. c. R-8 and R-10 Zones -Large Animals: Large animals are permitted on lots four (4) acres or greater in size. Only one large animal per two (2) acres is permitted. 52. Permitted when ancillary to a permitted use where food and beverages are served on the premises and located in an area with an Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use deSignation as shown on the City's Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map, and located south of 1-405. In the case of the 1M H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions Zone, the location is further limited to 1M-zoned areas south of SW 16th Street. Should any court of competent jurisdiction find that the City zoning for card rooms is unconstitutional or illegal, then the City elects to permit the existing card rooms to continue operation as nonconforming legal uses and otherwise bans card rooms. 53. Provided a temporary use permit is obtained consistent with the provisions of RMC 4-9-240, Temporary Use Permits. 54. Allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B.) Outside the EAV, the use shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Such uses shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) per building whose primary use is office. 55. a. Adult day care I on a property with a nonresidential facility is only allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV). See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. Outside of the EAV, an administrative conditional use permit is required. b. Adult day care I on a property containing a residential use requires an administrative conditional use permit in any location. 56. Except not permiSSible within the Employment Area Valley (EAV). (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B.) 57. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use deSignation, unless the use is accessory in which case it is allowed outside the EAV. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. 58. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. Outside of the EAV, use is allowed as an administrative conditional use. 59. Excluded within the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 60. Subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. Retail sales uses are limited to: flowers/plants and floral supplies; mini-marts; ne' .... sstands; entertainment-me€iia sales.crafts including sUDplies and finished products, gift shopps, speciality markets. 61. No drive-through service shall be permitted, except for financial institutions which are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows that shall be part of the exterior wall of the financial institution structure. 62. Outside the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation (see EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B), drive-through is permitted only when accessory to a financial institution. Financial institutions are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows that shall be part of the exterior wall of the financial institution structure. Within the EAV, drive-through service is permitted. 63. Subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. On~site services excluding drycleaning, real estate offices, and fitness centers. Instructional studios H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions limited to locations on a primary arterial with transit service.are limited to the following: barberlbeauty shops; laundromats; repair services; entertainmont media rental. 64. Limited to storage in association with rental services. In the CYS Zone and in the NE 4th Street Corridor, an administrative conditional use permit is required. Not allowed in the Sunset Cooridor. Size restrictions apply per RMC 4-2-120A·~ 65. Allowed outright in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation. (See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B.) Outside the EAV, the use is limited to health clubs/fitness centers/sports clubs, which shall be developed as part of larger office structures. Such uses shall not stand alone and shall not occupy more than twenty five percent (25%) of anyone floor of a building whose primary use is office. 66. Requires a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit, except that electrical power generation and co-generation is permitted as an accessory use when located more than one hundred feet (100') from any property zoned for residential use, i.e. RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10, R-14, RM, and producing less than ten (10) megawatts of electricity. In the CO Zone, the use must be accessory to a medical institution. 67. Chemical and allied products manufacturing operations, or operations which are conducted predominantly out of doors, require a Hearing Examiner conditional use permit in the 1M Zone, and an administrative conditional use permit in the IH Zone, except that these uses are not permissible in the area south of 1-405 and north of SW 16th Street. 68. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, uYses are subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. The following retail sale uses are not permitted: department stores; jewelry stores; office supply stores; pet shops and pet grooming. 69. In the Sunset Boulevard Corridor, uYses are subject to the size restrictions of RMC 4-2-120A. Only the following on-site service uses are. permitted: a. Financial and real estate services; repair services. excluding jewelry; entertainment media rental; b. Rental services not otherwise listed in subsection (69)(a) of this Section require an administrative conditional use permit. 70. No drive-through service shall be permitted, except for multi-story financial institutions which are permitted three (3) accessory drive-up windows. The accessory drive-through service shall be located to the side and/or rear of the building. and the windows shall be part of the exterior wall. Drive- through lanes shall not be located between the street and the main pedestrian access to the buildings. These requirements may be adjusted through the Site Plan review process. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 71. Only allowed in the Employment Area Valley (EAV) land use designation south of 1-405 subject to a Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit. See EAV Map in RMC 4-2-080B. No secure community transition facility (SCTF) shall: a. House more than six persons, excluding resident staff. Any increase in the number of resident beds shall require an entirely new application. b. Be allowed within three hundred thirty feet (330') of any residential zone located within or outside the City limits. c. Be allowed adjacent to, abutting, across a parking lot from, or within the "line of sight" from a "risk potential activity" as defined in RCW 71.09.020, now or as hereafter amended, or risk potential facilities in existence at the time a site is listed for consideration. For the purposes of granting a Conditional Use Permit for siting an SCTF, the Reviewing Official shall consider a permanent, unobstructed visual distance of six hundred feet (600') to be within "line of sight." The Reviewing Official may reduce the distance to less than six hundred feet (600') through the Conditional Use Permit process, if the applicant can demonstrate that a visual barrier exists or can be created that would reduce the line of sight to less than six hundred feet (600'). Risk potential facilities currently include, but are not limited to: Community and recreation centers, Churches, synagogues, temples and mosques, Licensed day care, Licensed preschool facilities, Public libraries, Public parks, Public and private schools, School bus stops, Sports fields, or Publicly dedicated trails. d. Be located within one mile from any SCTF, work release, prerelease, or similar facility. Note: "Distance" referenced in paragraphs b, c, and d of this section is measured by following a straight line from the nearest point of the building in which the secure community treatment facility is to be located, to the nearest H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions point of the zoning boundary line or property line of the lot on which the buffered use is located. The City may impose conditions to mitigate any potential adverse impact of the SCTF on surrounding uses, except that the Conditional Use Permit conditions may not impose restrictions on the SCTF greater than those set forth in RCW 71.09.285 through 71.09.340 inclusive. 72. Big-box retail to be permitted in the COR 3 Zone, east of Garden Avenue North and north of N. 8th Street. 73. Within the Center Village Zone, Residential Bonus District, "residential only uses" are limited to townhouse development in the range of 7-20 dwelling units per acre. Garden style apartments are prohibited. Flats or townhouses, when in a mixed-use structure that combines residential with first floor commercial uses. Projects within the Center Village are also subject to the provisions and development standards in RMC 43-095 C and 0, Center Village Residential Bonus District. a. Subject to the denSity limitations located in the development standards for this zone. Projects within the Suburban and Neighborhood Cent€f Residential Bonus District, RMC 4 3 095B3, are also subject to the f*Gvisions and development standards in RMC 4 3 095C and D, Suburban and Neighborhood Center Residential Bonus District. G: VVithin the Center Village (CV) Comprehensive Plan designation, 8attached dwelling unit developments in the range of ten (10) to twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre may only be townhouse unit types. 74. a. Flats permitted only north of N. 8th Street unless part of a mixed use structure with ground-floor, commercial. Flats are permitted with a maximum density of eighty five (85) d.u./net acre. All residential parking except that intended for guests is required to be located in structured parking. A bonus of up to one hundred fifty (150) d.u./net acre permitted for flats in a mixed use structure with ground-floor commercial uses within them. b. Townhouses: Parking is required to be provided under a structure. A maximum height of three stories is allowed for townhouses. Minimum density of twenty (20) d.u.lnet acre permitted and maximum of twenty five (25) d.u./net acre permitted. 75. Only permitted west of Park Ave. and south of N. 8th Street. 76. Only Grades 9 through 12 permitted. 77. a. Only permitted north of N. 8th Street and as part of a mixed use structure. b. Limited to training related to research and development, arts, computer sciences, business, culinary arts, medical-related fields and/or other knowledge-based industries. ' H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions 78. No freestanding structures permitted unless architecturally and functionally integrated into an overall shopping center or mixed use development. 79. a. Must function as an anchor to larger retail developments that are planned as part of an integrated and cohesive center. b. Big-box use must be connected to additional structures within a shopping center with supporting retail or service uses structures with common walls, or plazas, or other similar features, excluding pushcarts/kiosks. c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 80. Drive-through windows must abut a building facade or wall and must be located within the building footprint. 81. No stand-alone structures smaller than five thousand (5,000) square feet, except for pushcarts/kiosks, unless architecturally and functionally integrated into a shopping center or mixed use development. 82. a. Multi-story, stand-alone retail buildings greater than seventy five thousand (75,000) square feet are allowed only with structured parking and a maximum building footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square feet. b. No freestanding structures smaller than five thousand (5,000) square feet are permitted, unless architecturally and functionally integrated into overall shopping center or mixed use development. c. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 83. a. Movie facilities with more than four (4) screens must be architecturally and functionally integrated into overall shopping center or mixed use development. b. Buildings oriented along Park Avenue must have one or more pedestrian entries on Park Avenue. 84. Permitted subject to the conditional use criteria regarding airport compatibility located in RMC 4-3-020. 85. Only permitted south of N. 8th Street. 86. Limited to airplane manufacturing, biotechnology, life science, information technology (Le., hardware, software, computer components), or other high technology industry. 87. a. Attached Dwelling Units, General: Not allowed within one thousand (1-,pOO) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. Permitted as mixed use structures with ground-floor commercial except that parcels may be developed exclusively for attached dwelling units if: i. The entire frontage of the block is residential, H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions ii. Support facilities such as exercise facilities, lobbies, etc., face the street frontage a.nd living areas are in the rear, or iii. Entries to attached dwelling units ate slightly elevated above the sidewalk level. b. Stacked Flats: In addition to required provisions of attached dwelling units, general, above, the following provisions are required: i. Structured parking is required north of N. 8th Street. ii. South of N. 8th Street, only guest parking may be provided as surface parking. iii. A minimum of twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre are required. c. Townhouses: In addition to required provisions of attached dwelling units, general, above, a minimum density of twenty (20) dwelling units per net acre is required. 88. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking is required north of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 89. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. 90. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 91. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. If located north of N. 8th Street, then must be located in a mixed use structure. d. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets, must have ground-floor commercial uses within thEilm. 92. a. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. b. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. c. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 93. a. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions b. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 94. a. Must be located within a mixed use structure. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 95. a. Multi-story, stand-alone retail buildings greater than seventy five thousand (75,000) square feet are allowed only with structured parking and a maximum building footprint of sixty five thousand (65,000) square feet. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. 96. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. Beyond one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of the Renton Municipal Airport runway, this use is allowed subject to the conditional use criteria regarding airport compatibility located at RMC 4-3-020. b. Structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have grOl,md-fioor commercial uses within them. 97. The use shall be architecturally and functionally integrated into a larger mixed use development. 98. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Structured parking is required. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 99. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 100. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. b. Must be located within a mixed use structure. 101. a. Not permitted within one thousand (1,000) feet of the centerline of Renton Municipal Airport runway. \ b. Permitted only south of N. 8th Street. c. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 102. Buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. 103. Structured parking is required. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc 4-2-080 to be amended b" the following revisions 1 04. a. Limited to airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, biotechnology, life science, information technology (Le., hardware, software, computer components), or other high technology industry. b. For uses other than airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, structured parking required north of N. 8th Street. c. For uses other than airplane manufacturing and related accessory uses, buildings oriented to pedestrian streets must have ground-floor commercial uses within them. (Ord. 4186,11-14-1988; Ord. 4404, 6-7-1993; Ord. 4432,12-20-1993; Ord. 4466, 8-22-1994; Ord. 4631, 9-9-1996; Ord. 4736,8-24-1998; Ord. 4773,3-22-1999; Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Ord. 4786, 7-12-1999; Ord. 4802,10-25-1999; Ord. 4803, 10-25-1999; Ord. 4827,1-24-2000; Ord. 4840,5-8-2000; Ord. 4847,6-19-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002; Ord. 4982,9-23-2002; Ord. 5001,2-10-2003; Ord. 5018,9-22-2003; Ord. 5027, 11-24-2003; Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc B. EMPLOYMENT AREA VALLEY: 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions (Ord. 4722,5-11-1998; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc C. DOWNTOWN CORE AREA: 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg. doc RE"nton MI,Jr'licipn\ 4-2-080 to be amended bv the following revisions H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc (Amd. Ord. 4963.5-13-2002) D. DOWNTOWN PEDESTRIAN DISTRICT: 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions ,., cu ~... Q,o .,->.-> . "" : .£ -;; d % .' ::1: ..• ,w 1o.;...,;;;i1l;..;.;i..L..J..I.JJL....J 1'.'--'" ~-..... '" ,......---- ;i~~~~ ---:j ZJ L:JLj §~ ~~~U - (Amd. Ord. 4963.5-13-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg.doc E. ARTERIAL STREET PLAN: '-_v.-r ___ " ....... _a .to _ ..... ~...,.~_~_s .. *"'-' __ ~ 'l. t.~.M..~ ...... N-....,..~MbI .. ~ =.~:e:=::;-:=~ ... t. ~~~'-~ .... K"-.."Gw ... , ... lifa 1aa\.C9ft~"" ~It..t.. t: .. w"""..., ................... Ib~ ... ... L IIE:ttUC_ ...... ~lhLW ....... CIt ... 4L ~lItMIII'"'".....,.,.~,..".,. .... 4\. ._a.AlE_ ... _--.~It __ K .r. JI;.:t.t..c ......... &.MMI. .... tE ..... ay ..... .. ...... ~--.-..... ""'-~.-..... 1c...JD4a __ ~.IH.. .............. a .1. .. 1Q ...... ~ ............ ,.." .. it ~"'~_I.ojoo /OOh~" -__ ~ .t..IIIII' ...... ..,.--.-..~ .......... INt .• 1L.a.....t ........ ~,.,..,.wlD;""_ . ,~ -~-~----~"'-...... a "-!\\W{ ___ 1 10_-. ta. .......... 1LJI:Ii 4iHta .......... Q(lI:6tt ..... C»t.-.. Ih T .... ~16aoA.'MIL ... ~g., ... _PoS_&_IIf. __ Plt_ K.~.--. ........... ,..,.n. ... ", .... Pt ..... -.I __ IIIWI.l.Wk,*U"lottok ..... -h ~AM..ICE __ .::dItJ::rIil*II __ Cb""" "' -""l'~~""\<ooh~II~ __ 1iI ~ =~:="~~:-t:=!Lc.s ... 2t. ............... (~I:.-~.1I.a.& .... a;, ..... )1.,.....~~Or.lJc"..loItd~I .. r..A-adr:1I&1iI!: ~~ _ .... 1C __ ~, ..... _ .... _ II II-.~.*"" ....... Sbt""'~.b~"""" 11. l,.-.iSl.Jt'IIII''''''IIl. ... ~h#L .... ~.--.::sw !!: ~ .!i..'.!:"~..:~.!!~~s 31.. ..... '-"t.~ ...... IIII .. $C.-Iof"IINJia .... ~ • ...-.-,....~,.. .... , .... )! .. a.IIa,,~,..., ::J.I. Mi!IIIIIt:..ha .. .,., .... N ... ~M. .. .. .QIrinMIK. ... l'o7IIit..., 11 ... " f"Wt> ~ 411 iC~!.I. ....... r..\. ...... _.-~~w "', ~ ...... M!'"-• .,ill.ld-.. lE.p..,...cc. q. ....... 1Wc..1C:~~~~4~~~fbb. A. ~,JICI-~~'MEh-:t...s..'E~-k IH.. IIC ;ue,~~".".~'~ ............. ~ioIIS .. tzn...d..;t"...,.,....e a.1riI~1IL.""""r: ....... " .... rM.DIj 4&. ~~~.w:.~,.JWQ!3 .. ~~bIIiI CJ'~ 1IHm:. .. --..~Aofr.~IIcIc,.....,.,...,..,"-t .... ~b...w: ..... PE..,.."" ... :S.nMII ... N; Go __ ''-1101''' ........... ..., \ \ \\ .. 'I , . \ \ , ; I \. ,.',; • .. _- ..... ~ ..... .,.-, --'--- (Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002) 4-2-080 to be amended by the following revisions . '\.." Ilk M..,.. .. ~\,bfJ.a...IId~ ...... &w '1 . ..,~ ..... ~-w.~ ..... ~m.wlslll 1t.~""""'IK~ .... ~IIE"K"""~ "'JIE_:JI_~_~ .. _""',K ... ~_a.. ___ I&!! .. ~""'K p. _ ...... 00;:_ ... :1>14"" ........ ,,_ M.~~ .. ,...., __ M(ltt:lt'_ ....... ill. K ",,,,,-,.a -..!.a.-."", ~ ........ ~,.; ... ¥ ... II.-~-~.--I< Is e.l __ ~_IC __ .. o£W .. l& ~""h1lIIME ... a __ ....... " ................ ..r; ... __ """' ............ __ .... e.o .. _Oo-- P.tlX.1l.hII~ .... iIf.r_~., Po ", ___ ,..alE ..... IWCIj .. _ .... _ .... ..".~ .... _hl __ "_Q«_ K. .,.Ul. ___ ~""-Ioo.' Ia __ :'_''''~Io~ __ ''''' r'.~"""".""""jJnII~"~""'" 1L __ a_,HII ....... ~ ... -......*_.W~ .. ,,.lo, ra. ~ .............. ~~swlD.., .... 1IL 1"1. M\N."'~~~ ........ LW ........ D'f /2--___ '-'_"',, __ '*- n.l~~Mlt""'fiigIatillWlIi"--'~'" t .. t<H4N"_~Yor_D~""'" tL 1W .... 1l .... ~1j>..,'"'~w......M~ ,. .... tt.M .......... M;,owI~~ ... 'b~ .... '" ".laIo.a.,..,..,. ..... II~.,. ... 6:bIl~a H ....... ",.,. . ..., ... -. ..... N_a. .. UN~...". 'L .......... Kw..fC:~U.ID ... ~ IIooc.N M>tt14· ........ ........ ~ f..,.-...s at.dk~IIJU~~~i",(IlD"'~ .. t .. ~ .-..~ .... &W,.. .... twJlllDl H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 2 updated from MRSC 4-2-080 leg_doc , Vt:LUt"M~"' rlJ""" .... "'" . CITY OF RENTON 4-2-110A to be amended by adding the following 4-2-110A DEVELOpH~¥mARDS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) RC R-l R-4 .&-5 DENSITY (Net Density inDwelling Units per Net A~re) Minimum None None NOlle N<me Housing Density for proposed short plats or subdivisions Maximum 1 Dwelling Unit 1 Dwelling Unit 4 Dwelling Units ~Pw~>--l:-4lits Housing Density per 10 Net Acres per 1 Net Acre .Qer I Net Acre pef-.J-Ne-t:-Aere 'NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PERLOT Maximum 1 Dwelling Unit 1 dwelling unit 1 dwelling unit -J-dwelling-uB:it Number per legal per 10 Net Acres lot LOT DIMENSlONS ,.: .' ':;, .'.··f ' ~:: ,", , . ,~ '. , ' .. , "j: "', I, <>. Minimum Lot 10 Acres 1 Acre 8,000 sg. ft. +,20Q stj. ft. Size for lots Where smaller lot created after July 4,500 sq. ft. for '1,50Q stj. ft. for asse11lblages are 11,1993 cluster elttsfer allowed R-8 development standards shall de:velopmem ~ Minimum Lot 150 ft. for 75ft. for interior 70 ft. for interior @-ft-:-4iw-mwri:eF Width interior lots. lots. lots. lets-, for lots created 175 ft. for comer 85 ft. for comer SO It. for corner after July 11, lots. lots. lots. ~)rcorner 1993 Where smaller lot lets assemblages are allowed R-8 standards shall !!12nlL H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-JlOA.doc08/2412004 9:34AM -1- R-8 .. &4.. dufnet acre 8 Dwelling Units per 1 Net Acre - fuf...6l:iBel¥is il:HI atl6kHi~ men ~ at: lats gFeateftl:!~ grass aeH! iH si:ce, as of~'iarch I, ~ ~W<.4lffig Units per 1 Net ACfe for SHBEli",isioH sAEtlor ae,.'elopmeHt of 1015 1.2 gross aCfe ffi--si:ce-or--les5-;~S sf-MaFcl:! I, 199§ I dwelling unit '.' . , 4,500 sq. ft. for 12arcels greater than 'l., gross acre 5.000 sg. ft. for 12arcels less than % acre 50 ft. for interior lots. 60 ft for comer lots. Minimum Lot 200 ft. 85 ft. Depth for lots created after July J J, J993 RC R-l SETBACKS· Minimum Front 30 ft. 30 ft. Yard Minimum Side 30 ft. 20 ft. Yard Along a Street Minimum Side 25 [t. 15 [t. Yard Minimum Rear 35 ft. 25 ft. Yard Clear Vision In no case shall In no case shall a Area a structure over structure over 42 42 in. in height in. in height intlUde into the intrude into the 20 [1. clear 20 [t. clear vision vision area area defined in defmed in RMC RMC 4-1030. 4-1030. Minimum 10ft. landscaped lOft. landscaped Freeway andlor setback from the setback from the Arterial Frontage street property street property Setback line line BUILDING STANDARDS· ':';-;,1.; :';", '" .,.," Maximum 2 stories and 30 2 stories and 3Q Building Height f1. ft. and Number of Stories, except for uses having a 80 [t. Where smaller lot asseniblages are allowed R-8 standards shall !!l2l2Jv ~ R-4 30 ft. Where smaller lot assemblages are allowed 20 ft. for the Ilrimarv stlllcture and 25 feet for an attached or detached garage. 20 ft. , Where smaller lot assemblages are allowed 15 ft. 10ft. ;rLR Where smaller lot assemblages are allowed 20 ft. I1lllo case shall a stlUcture over 42. in. in height intrude into the ?O ft. clear vision area defined in RivlC 4- 11-030. 10ft. landscaped setback from the street propeliy line ,]. .: 2 stories and 30 ft. for standard roof. 2 stories and 35 ft for roofs having a 4-2:-110A . to be aI?ended by adding the following +Mh 65 ft. I : , R-8 {,Jail with Stfeet 15 ft. for primary Aeeess Canlge: structure. 15 ft. fof4l.le ~tFe 20 ft. for attached an~)...j:l:-fuF garages accessed. attaeheEl gamges from front yard I \filth aeeess from street. the front yard sireet-, ~-ft/ -f0l'-tlre 15 ft.7 for the pfi~ primary structure' an<:i-W-tl:-fuF-.the and 20 ft. for the atta€hed-ga-mges attached garages Ml-iGfl-{H.'«"Ss-fFoffi which access from the-side yard along the side yard a-sffee~ along a street. ~ 5ft ~b-20 ft. In no case shall a In no case shall a ~~2 structure over 42 tfu-in height intfWe in. in height tfflo-the 20 tl cleaF intrude into the 20 ¥i&ioR-afea definoo f1. clear vision in R:i>.4G 4 11 Q3Q. area defmed in RMC 4-11-030. M-ft,..-laH4;~ 10ft. landscaped setaaelE Hom the setback from the street property line street property line "','" ", I .' , , ., 2-stefi~ 2 stories and 30 ft. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-IIOA.doc08/24/2004 9:33 AM ' -2- "Public Suffix" (Pl designation9 Maximum Height See RMC4-4-See RMC4-4- for Wireless 140G. 140G. Communication Facilities RC R-l I BUILDING STANDARDS .. .... ,. Maximum Lots 5 acres or 35%. Building more: 2%. An Coverage additional 5% of (Including primary the total area and accessory may be used for buildings) agricultural buildings. Lots 10,000 sq. ft. to 5 acres: 15%. On lots greater than I acre, an additional 5% of the total area may be used for agricultural buildings. Lots 10,000 sq. ft. or less: 35%. Maximum Jm[!crvious Surface Area Special Architectural Features 9 Qitch greater than %. See RMC4-4- 140G. R-4 Lots greater than 51000 sg. ft.: 35% or 2,500 sg. ft., whichever is greater. Lots 5,000·sg. ft. or less: 50% 75110 Special architectural features shall be Qrovided on all dwelling units in such assemblages. These shall include decorative hill or gable roofs with a I1itch egual to or greater than one to two (1 :2}, windows and doors with decorative trim at least four inches (4") in width, and eaves Qrojecting at least twenty-four inches (24"} from the face of the 4-2-110A to be amended by adding the following See RMG-4-4-SeeRMC 4-4- -14(}(+' 140G. R-S R-8 Lots grenter-tlllHl Lots gR*feF-tlHtn ~O sq. ft.: 35%, 5,000 sq. ft . ..!!!: t1f-2;~ greater: 35% or wltiffieve-rts 2,500 sq. ft., grearef; whichever is greater. Lots 5,000 sq. ft. or lessl 50%. Lots 5,000 sq. ~lessthan 5:000 sg. ft.: 50%. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-J JOA.doc08/24/2004 9:33AM -3- RC R-l , BUILDING STANDARD,S': ' , '" , Vertical Fa~ade Modulation LANDSCAPING AND SCREE$ING", ' " :,',' Abutting Non- arterial Public Right-of-way Abutting Non- arterial Public Right-of-way 11 See Condition llin Section 4-2-IIOD building on at least seventy-five percent (75%} of the building's exterior perimeter with fascia at least ten inches (1 O") deep. R-4 All dwelling units shall provide vertical fa~ade modulation at least every twenty horizontal feet (20'), including front, side and rear fa~ades. , , All development shalll1rovide irrigated or drought resistant landscaJ2e planting striJ2 the greater of eight feet (8'} or the depth of the unim12roved 12Oliion of the abutting public right -of-way measured from the edge of pavement to the pro12eny line.II , All develoJ2ment shallgrovide an irrigated or drought resistant landscaJ2e J21anting strig the greater of eight feet (8') or the depth of the uniml1roved portion of the abutting J2ublic right-of-way measured from the edge ofQavement , , 4-2-110A to be amended by adding the following R-S R-8 " " " H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-11 OA.doc08/24/2004 9:33 AM -4- RC R-l LANDSCAPING AND' SCREENING.: Arterial Landscaping Front Yard Landscaping Evergreen Plantings II See Condition 11 in Section 4-2-11 OD 12 Se~e Condition 12 in Sectio1l4-2-11OD I to the property line.11 R-4 , Any development abutting an arterial shall provide decorative landscaping II, fencing, and wallingl2 in a dedicated landscape strip having a minimum average depth of ten feet (10') between all lots and such arterial. At least two (2) trees of an apQroved sgecies with a minimum caliQer of 1 Y:," Qer tree shall be planted in the front yard or Qlanting striI1 of every lot Qrior to occuQancy. At least fifty percent (50%) of the non-built Qortion of a lot shall be landscaped with drought resistant evergreen Qlant materials such as conifer trees, native shrubs ,," 4-2-110A to be amended by adding the following R-5 R-8 :, " H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-11 OA.doc~ 9:33AM -5- I ... Native Growth Conservation Easements or irrigated lawns. All I1ortions of a site that are not dedicated to I1latted single-family lots shall be set aside and left whenever l20ssible in their natural state. A Native Growth Conservation Easement shall be executed to I1rotect any: significant stands of trees or vegetation retained. 4-2-110A to be amended by adding the following H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \4-2-11 OA.doc08/2412004 9:33 AM -6- 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions 4-2-110F ... DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS (Primary and Attached Accessory Structures) R-10 R-14 RM DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units Per Net Acre) For any subdivision, and/or For parcels over 112 gross acre: 7-development: 4.13 l.units per net acre for any 8 units per net acre.4•13 'U' suffix: 10 25 units per net acre. subdivision or development.4•13 Minimum density requirements Minimum density requirements shall 'G' sl:Iffhc:: Hll::lAits peF Aet aGFe. Minimum Housing shall not apply to: a) the not apply to: a) the renovation or Density4,13 renovation or conversion of an conversion of an existing structure, or ~-N!",sl:Iffix: 1 0 units peF net aGHh existing structure, or b) the b) the subdivision and/or development 'T' suffix: 10 14 units per net acre. subdivision, and/or development of of a legal lot 1/2 gross acre or less in a legal lot 1/2 gross acre or less in size as of March 1, 1995. 'F'suffix: 10 units ~er net acre. size as of March 1, 1995. Minimum density requirements shall not apply to the renovation or conversion of an existing structure. For any subdivision and/or For developments or developmene subdivisions including attached For developments or subdivisions: 'u' suffix: 75 units per net acre.1O• or semi-attached dwellings: 10 14 dwelling units per net acre, except 24 Maximum Housing dwelling units per net acre.4 that density of up to 18 dwelling units 'C' suffix: 20 units peF Aet-aGf&.. Density per acre may be permitted subject to For Elevelepffients eF sl::li3Elivisiens conditions in RMC 4-9-065, Density 'N' sl:l#ix: ~ 13 \;Jnits fieF Aet aSFe. insluElin§ enly eetasReEl ElwelliA§s: Bonus Review.4 ~ a units fieF net aSFe. 4 'T' suffix: 35 units per net acre.1O 'F' suffix: 20 units Qer net acre. PLATS OR SHADOW PLATS General Uses shall be developed on a "legal IAII Uses: lot." For the ourooses of this Uses mav be develooed on either: a) NA -1- I I J subsection, "legal lot" means: a lot created through the subdivision process, or created through another mechanism which creates individual title for the residential building and any associated private yards. If title is created through another mechanism other than a subdivision, the development application shall be accompanied by a shadow plat and if, applicable. phasing or land reserve plan.18 Covenants shall be filed as part of a final plat in order to address the density and unit mix requirements of the zone. DWELLING UNIT MIX Existing development: None required. For parcels which are a maximum size of 1/2 acre as of the effective date hereof (March 1, 1995): None required. Full subdivisions and/or General development on parcels greater than 1/2 acre, excluding short plats: A minimum of 50% to a maximum of 100% of detached or semi-attached dwelling units. A minimum of one detached or semi- attached dwelling unit must be orovided for each attached dwell ina 4·2·110F to be amended by adding the following revisions properties which are platted through the subdivision process; or b) properties which are to remain unplatted. For properties which are to remain unplatted, the development application shall be accompanied by a shadow plat and if, applicable, phasing or land reserve plan. For purposes of this zone, "Iof' shall mean legal platted lot and/or equivalent shadow platted land area.1S Covenants shall be filed as part of a final plat in order to address the density and unit mix requirements of the zone. A minimum of 50% to a maximum of 100% of permitted units shall consist of detached, semi-attached or up to 3 consecutively attached townhouses. Up to 4 townhouse units may be consecutively attached if provisions of RMC 4-9-065 Density Bonus Review, are met. A maximum of 50% of the permitted NA units in a project may consist of: 4 to 6 consecutively attached townhouses Flats Townhouseslflats in one structure. Provided that buildings shall not exceed 6 dwelling units per structure, exceot as orovided in RMC 4-9-065. -2- -----, unit (e.g., townhouse or flat) created within a proposed development. A maximum of 4 units may be consecutively attached. 4 NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS PER LOT Only 1 residential building (e.g., detached dwelling, semi-attached dwelling, townhouse, flat, etc.) with a maximum Of 4 residential units and associated accessory structures for that building shall be permitted on a legal lot except for residential buildings legally existing at the General effective date hereof. For the purposes of this subsection, "legal lot" means a lot created through the subdivision process, or through another mechanism which creates individual title for the residential building and any associated private yards (e.g., condominium).4 LOT DIMENSIONS Density requirements shall take precedence over the following minimum lot size standards. For parcels which exceed 1/2 acre in size: Minimum Lot Size for lots created after July Detached and semi-attached 11, 1993 dwelling units: 3,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. Attached townhouse dwelling units: 2,000 sq. ft. per dwelling unit. 2 flats: 5,000 sq. ft. per structure. 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions Density Bonus Review. 1 residential structure and associated accessory buildings for that structure shall be permitted per lot, except for NA residential buildings legally existing at the date of adoption of this Section.4 Density requirements shall take precedence over the following minimum lot size standards. Residential Uses: Detached or semi-attached units: 3,000 sq. ft. None Up to 3 Townhouse Units Consecutively Attached: Attached exterior/end unit: 2,500 sq. ft. Attached interior/middle unit: 2,000 sq. -3- ., Minimum Lot Width for lots created after July 11, 1993 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions 3 flats: 7,500 sq. ft. per structure. ft. 4 flats: 10,000 sq. ft. per structure. Greater than 3 Townhouse Units For parcels that are 1/2 acre or Consecutively Attache~; F~ats; less in size as of March 1, 1995: Townhouse/Flat Comblnataons: No minimum lot size requirement Attached exterior/end townhouse unit: when they are subsequently 2,000 sq. ft. subdivided. Density requirements Attached interior/middle townhouse shall apply. unit or flats: 1,800 sq. ft. Detached or semi-attached dwellings: Interior lots: 30 ft. Corner lots: 40 ft. Townhouses: 20 ft.19 Flats: 50 ft. Commercial or Civic Uses: None. Residential Uses: Detached or semi-attached: 30 ft. Up to 3 Townhouse Units Consecutively Attached: Attached exterior/end townhouse unit: - 25 ft. Attached interior/middle townhouse unit: 20 ft. Greater than 3 Townhouse Units Consecutively Attached; Flats; Townhouse/Flat Combinations: Attached exterior/interior townhouse unit: 20 ft. Flats: 50 ft. Residential Uses: Detached or semi-attached: 50 ft. Up to 3 Townhouse Units Consecutively Attached: Attached exterior/interior townhouse 'T' suffix: 14 ft. All other suffixes: 50 ft. Minimum Lot Depth for lots created after 155 ft.19 unit: 45 ft. 165 ft. July 11, 1993 Greater than 3 Townhouse Units Consecutively Attached; Flats; Townhouse/Flat Combinations: Attached exterior/interior townhouse unit: 40 ft. Flats: 35 ft. -4- SETBACKS8 Minimum Front Yard Minimum Side Yard Along a Street Minimum Side Yard Along streets existin~ as of March 1, 1995: 20 ft.9• 0 Along streets created after March 1, 1995: 10ft. for the primary structure and 20 ft. for attached garages which access from the front yard street(s).20 10ft. for a primary structure, and 20 ft. for attached garages which access from the side yard street.20 Detached dwellings: 5 ft.3•20 Semi-Attached and Attached Units: 5 ft. for the unattached side(s) of the structure. 0 ft .. for the I • I I \ 20 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions Residential Uses: Detached and semi-attached units with parking access provided from the front: 18 ft.20 Detached and semi-attached units with parking access provided from the rear via street or alley: 10ft., unless the lot is adjacene4 to a property zoned RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, or R-10, then setback must be 15 ft.20 'U' suffix: 5 ft.1.2 Attached units, and their accessory 'T' ff" 5 ft t t 'th k' 'd d su IX. . S ruc ures WI par mg provi e from the front: 20 ft.20 'F' suffix: 20 ft. Attached units and their accessory structures with parking provided from the rear via street or alley: 10 ft., unless the lot is adjacene4 to a property zoned RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, or R-10, then setback must be 15 ft.20 Commercial or Civic Uses: 10ft. -except when abutting 15 or adjacent 14 to residential development then 15 ft.20 Residential Uses: 10ft. for a primary structure, and 18 ft. for attached garages wh ich access from the side yard street. 20 Residential Uses: Detached and semi-attached primary structures: 5 ft.20 Attached townhouses, flats over 3 units and their accessory -5- 'U' and 'T' suffixes and on all previously existing platted lots which are 50 ft. or less in width: 10 ft. All other suffixes with lots over 50 ft. in width: 20 ft. 'T' suffix -Attached Units: A minimum of 3 ft. for the unattached side(s) of the structure. 0 ft. for the attached side(s). attached side(s).20 Abutting RC, R-1, R-5 or R-S: 15 25 ft. interior side yard setback for all structures containing 3 or more attached dwelling units on a 101.20 . . Unit with Attached Street Access Garage: 15 ft. However, if the lot abuts a lot zoned RC, R-1, R-5, or Minimum Rear Yard R-8, a 25 ft. setback shall be required of all attached dwelling units.2O 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions structures: 5 ft. on both sides. 10ft. Standard Minimum Setbacks for when the lot is adjacent14 to a lower all other suffixes: Minimum intensity residentially zoned setbacks for side yards:22 property.20 Lot width: less than or equal to 50 Attached accessory structures: ft. -Yard setback: 5 ft. None required.2O Lot width: 50.1 to 60 f1. -Yard Commercial or Civic Uses: setback: 6 ft. None -except when abutting15 or Lot width: 60.1 to 70 ft. -Yard adjacent14 to residential development setback: 7 ft. -15 ft.20 Lot width: 70.1 to 80 ft. -Yard setback: 8 ft. Lot width: 80.1 to 90 f1. -Yard setback: 9 ft . Lot width 90.1 to 100 ft. -Yard setback: 10ft . . Lot width 100.1 to 110 ft. -Yard setback: 11 ft. Lot width: 110.1 + ft. -Yard setback: 12 ft. Additional Setbacks for Structures Greater than 2 Stories: The entire structure shall be set back an additional 1 ft. for each story in excess of 2 up to a maximum cumulative setback of 20 ft. Special side yard setback for lots abutting single family residential zones RC, R-1, R-5, R-S, and R- 10: 15 25 ft. along the abutting side(s) of the property. Residential Uses: 'u' suffix: 5 ft.,l,2 unless lot abuts a 15 ft.20 RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, or R-10 zone, Commercial or Civic Uses: then 25 ft. None -except when abutting15 or 'T' suffix: 5 ft. adjacent14 to residential development then 15 ft.20. ... 'F' suffix: 15 ft. -6- 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions Unit with Attached Alley Access I Garage: 3 ft. provided that the garage must be set back a sufficient distance to provide a minimum of 24 ft. of back-out room, counting alley surface. If there is occupiable space , above an attached garage with alley access, the minimum setback for the occupiable space shall be the same as the minimum setback for the unit with attached alley access garage.20 In no case shall a structure over 42 I h II t t 42 . In no case shall a structure over 42 . . h . ht' t d . t th 20 ft n no case s a as ruc ure over In.. . h . ht' t d . t th 20 ft In. In elg In ru e In 0 e . . h . ht' t d . t th 20 ft I In. In elg In ru e In 0 e . Clear Vision Area clear vision area defined in RMC 4-I~. elg In ru ~ In ~ e . c ear clear vision area defined in RMC 4- 11-030. -vIsion area defined In RMC 4-11-030. 11-030. - Minimum Freeway 10 ft. landscaped setback from the 10 ft. landscaped setback from the 10 ft. landscaped setback from the Frontage Setback street property line. street property line. street property line. BUILDING STANDARDS Residential Uses: Maximum Number of 2 stories and 30 ft. See RMC 4-9-065, 'U' suffix: 50 ft./5 stories. Stories and Maximum Density Bonus Review. ". . B 'Id' H' ht T suffiX: 35 ft./3 stones. UI mg elg, 2 stories and 30 ft. in height. Commercial Uses: .. 56 except for Public uses 1 story and 20 ft. 'F' suffiX: 35 ft./3 stones .. having a "Public Suffix" C· . U (P) d . t' 721 IVIC ses: eSlgna Ion. . 2 t . sones. Maximum Height for Wireless See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-140G. Communication Facilities Residential Uses: Dwellings shall be arranged in a manner which creates a neighborhood Building Location NA environment. NA Residential units and any associated __ __ __ __ _____ ___ __ com~ercial de~eloDmentwithin_~n __ _______ _ ______ _ -7- - ------ Building Design NA - 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions overall development shall be connected through organization of roads, blocks, yards, central places, pedestrian linkage and amenity features. Front facades of structures shall address the public street, private street or court by providing: - a landscaped pedestrian connection; and -an entry feature facing the front yard. Residential Uses: Architectural design shall incorporate: a) Variation in vertical and horizontal modulation of structural facades and roof lines among individual attached dwelling units (e.g., angular design, modulation, multiple roof planes),and b) private entry features which are designed to provide individual ground-'U'suffix: floor connection to the outside for detached, semi-attached, and Modulation of vertical and townhouse units. horizontal facades is required at a Commercial or Civic Uses: minimum of 2 ft. at an interval of a Structures shall be: minimum offset of 40 ft. on each a) Designed to serve as a focal point building face. for the residential community; and b) 'U' and 'T' suffixes: compatible with architectural character See RMC 4-3-100 for Urban Center and site features of surrounding Design Overlay Regulations. residential development and characteristics; and c) designed to include a common motif or theme; and d) pedestrian oriented through such measures as: pedestrian walkways, pedestrian amenities and improvements which support a variety of modes of transportation (e.g., bicycle racks). ------_._-- -8- Project Size NA Limitations Maximum Building NA Length Detached or semi-attached units: Maximum Building 70%. Coverage Flats or townhouses: 50%. Maximum Impervious Detached or semi-attached units: 75%. Surface Area -------------- 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions Civic Uses: The maximum lot area dedicated for civic uses shall be limited to 10% of the net developable area of a property. Building size shall be limited to 3,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area, except that by Hearing Examiner conditional use permit civic uses may be allowed to be a maximum of 5,000 sq. ft. for all uses.4 NA Commercial Uses: The maximum area dedicated for all commercial uses shall be limited to 10% of the net developable portion of a property. Building size shall be limited to 3,000 sq. ft. of gross floor area.4 Up to 3 Consecutively Attached Townhouses: Building length shall not exceed 85 ft., unless otherwise granted per RMC 4-9-065, Density Bonus Review. Over 3 Consecutively Attached NA Townhouses; Flats; Townhouses/Flats in One Structure: Shall not exceed 115 ft. in length, unless otherwise granted per RMC 4-9- 065, Density Bonus Review. 'U' suffix: 75%. 'T' suffix: 75%. 'F' suffix: 35%. 50%. a maximum coverage of 45% may be obtained through the Hearing Examiner site development plan review process. 'U' and 'T' suffixes: 85%. NA All other suffixes: 75%. -9- Flats or townhouses: 60%. LANDSCAPING Setback areas shall be landscaped, excluding driveways and walkways General except for detached, semi-attached, or 2 attached residential units. ----------- SCREENING Surface Mounted or Roof Top Equipment, See RMC 4-4-095. or Outdoor Storage Recyclables and See RMC 4-4-090. Refuse DUMPSTER/RECYCLING COLLECTION AREA Minimum Size and Location See RMC 4-4-090. Requirements PARKING AND LOADING General See RMC 4-4-080. 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions Residential Uses: The entire front setback, excluding Setback areas shall be landscaped, driveways and an entry walkway, shall unless otherwise determined be landscaped. through the site development plan Commercial or Civic Uses: review process.23 Lots abutting public streets shall be For RM-U, the landscape improved with a minimum 10 ft. wide landscaping strip.16 requirement does not apply in the Downtown Core (see RMC 4-2- Lots abutting 15 residential property(ies) 080C), or if setbacks are reduced.1 zoned RC, R-1, R-5, R-8, R-10 or R-14 If abutting15 a lot, zoned RC, R-1, shall be improved along the common R-5, R-8, or R-10, then a 15 ft. landscape strip shall be required boundary with a minimum 15 ft. wide along the abutting-portions of the landscaped setback and a sight-lot. 17 obscuring solid barrier wall.17 See RMC 4-4-095. See RMC 4-4-095. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 4-4-080. Commercial/Civic: Parking areas All suffixes: See RMC 4-4-080. abutting residential development shall be screened with a solid barrier fence -10- For any unit, required parking shall be provided in the rear yard area when alley access is available. For flats, when alley access is not available. parking should be located in the rear yard. side yard or underground. unless it is determined Required Location through the modification process for for Parking site development plan exempt proposals or the site development plan review process for non-exempt proposals, that parking may be allowed in the front yard or that under building parking (ground level of a residential structure) should be permitted. SIGNS General See RMC 4-4-100. CRITICAL AREAS General See RMC 4-3-050 and 4-3-090. SPECIAL DESIGN STANDARDS General Street Patterns: Non-meandering street oatterns and the orovision of ----- and/or landscaping. NA See RMC 4-4-100. 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions _~" sI;lUi*es: eitAef-I:IfI-GeF!3FeblnEi f3aFkin!3 eF j3aFkin!3 stFblGtblFes sRali ge j3F9viEleEl, blnless tAFebl!3R lRe site Eievelepment j3lan Feview j3FOcess it is EieteFmineEi tAat Eible te en'liHmmental eF f3AysiGal site censtFaints sl:Jrface 9F l:JnEleF 9b1ilEiing j3aFkin!3 (QFeblnEi leliel ef a FesiElential stFl:Jctl:JFe) sAel:llEi ge alleweEi. 'u' and 'T' suffixes: For lots abutting an alley: all parking shall be provided in the rear portion of the yard. and access shall be taken from the alley. For lots not abutting an alley: no portion of covered or uncovered parking shall be located between the primary structure and the front property line. Parking structures shall be recessed from the front facade of the primary structure a minimum of 2 ft. 'N' and 'I"F' suffixes: Surface parking is permitted in the side and rear yard areas only. See RMC 4-4-100. See RMC 4-3-050 and 4-3-090. See RMC 4-3-050 and 4-3-090. NA Properties abutting 15 a less intense residential zone mav be reauired to -11- --, I I alleys (confined to side yard or rear yard frontages) shall be the predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted within this zone; provided, that this does not cause the need for lots with front and rear street frontages or dead- end streets. Cul-de-sacs shall be allowed when required to provide public access to lots where a through street cannot be provided or where topography or sensitive areas necessitate them. EXCEPTIONS Nothing herein shall be determined to prohibit the construction of a single family dwelling and its accessory buildings or the existence of a single family dwelling or two attached dwellings, existing as of March 1, 1995, on a pre-existing Pre-Existing Legal legal lot provided that all setback, lot Lots coverage, height limits, infrastructure, and parking requirements for this Zone can be satisfied, and provisions of RMC 4- 3-050, Critical Areas, and other provisions of the Renton Municipal Code can be met. 4-2-110F to be amended by adding the following revisions incorporate special design standards (e.g., additional landscaping, larger setbacks, facade articulation, solar access, fencing) through the site development plan review process. Properties abutting 15 a designated "focal center" or "gateway," as defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan, may be required to provide special design features similar to those listed above through the site development plan review process. Nothing herein shall be determined Nothing herein shall be determined to to prohibit the construction of prohibit the construction of a single attached dwellings having no more family dwelling and its accessory than two units in the structure, and buildings on a pre-existing legal lot its accessory buildings on a pre- provided that all setback, lot coverage, existing legal lot provided that all height limits, infrastructure, and parking setback, lot coverage, height limits, requirements for this Zone can be infrastructure, and parking satisfied, and provisions of RMC 4-3-requirements for this zone can be 050, Critical Areas, and other satisfied, and provisions of RMC 4- provisions of the Renton Municipal 3-050, Critical Areas, and other Code can be met. provisions of the Renton MuniCipal Code can be met. (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4788, 7-19-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 4985,10-14-2002; Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) -12- 4-2-110H CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATION to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-110H CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE FOR MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1. Front and rear setbacks in the RM-U Zone may be reduced to zero feet (0') by the Reviewing Official during the site development plan review process provided the applicant demonstrates that the project will provide a compensatory amenity such as an entryway courtyard, private balconies or enhanced landscaping. 2. If the structure located in the RM-U Zone exceeds four (4) stories in height, a fifteen foot (15') front setback from the property line shall be required of all portions of the structure which exceed four (4) stories. This requirement may be modified by the Reviewing Official during the site development plan review process to a uniform five foot (5') front setback for the entire structure; provided, that the structure provides a textured or varied facade (e.g., multiple setbacks, brickwork and/or ornamentation) and consideration of the pedestrian environment (e.g., extra sidewalk width, canopies, enhanced landscaping). 3. Minimum side yard setbacks for detached dwellings on lots with zero lot line on one side: ten feet (10') on side with side yard. Five feet (5') maintenance/no build easements on lots adjoining the zero lot line shall be required. 4. Use-related provisions are not variable. Use-related provisions that are not eligible for a variance include: building size, units per structure/lot, or densities. Unless bonus size or density provisions are specifically authorized, the modification of building size, units per structure, or densities requires a legislative change in the code provisions and/or a Comprehensive Plan amendmenVrezone. 5. In all districts except the "U" and ''T,'' more stories and an additional ten feet (10') in height may be obtained through the provision of additional amenities such as pitched roofs, additional recreation facilities, underground parking, and/or additional landscaped open space areas, as determined through the site development plan review process. 6. In the "fE" District, additional height for a residential dwelling structure may be obtained through the site development plan review process depending on the compatibility of the proposed buildings with adjacent existing residential development. In no case shall the height of a residential structure exceed forty five feet (45'). 7. In no case shall building height exceed the maximum allowed by the Airport Related Height and Use Restrictions, for uses located within the Federal Aviation Administration Airport Zones designated under RMC 4-3-020. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\4-2-11OH leg.doc Page 1 of 4 8. Allowed projection into setbacks: a. Fireplace structures, bay or garden windows, enclosed stair landings, and similar structures as determined by the Zoning Administrator may project twenty four inches (24") into any setback in the R-10, R-14 and RM Zones and may project thirty inches (30") into a street setback in the R-14 Zone, provided, such projections are: (i) Limited to two (2) per facade. (ii) Not wider than ten feet (10'). b. Fences, rockeries, and retaining walls with a height of forty eight inches (48") or less may be constructed within any required setback; provided, that they are located outside of the twenty foot (20') clear vision area specified in RMC 4-11-030, definition of "clear vision area." c. Uncovered steps and decks not exceeding eighteen inches (18") above the finished grade may project to the property line. d. Steps and decks having no roof covering and being not over forty two inches (42") high may be built within the front yard setback. e. In the R-14 Zone only, uncovered decks eighteen inches (18") or higher above grade at any pOint along outer edge of structure may project twenty four inches (24") into an interior setback. f. Eaves and cornices may project up to twenty four inches (24") into any required setback. 9. A front yard setback of less than twenty feet (20') may be allowed by the Development Services Division if the average front setback of existing primary structures on lots abutting the side yards is less than twenty feet (20'). In such case, the front yard setback shall not be less than the average of the front setback of the abutting primary structures; however, in no case shall a minimum setback of less than twenty feet (20') be allowed for garages which access from the front yard street(s). 10. See RMC 4-3-100, Urban Center Design Overlay Regulations. 11. Except animal husbandry related structures. 12. In order to be considered detached, a structure must be sited a minimum of six feet (6') from any residential structure. 13. In the event the applicant shows that minimum density cannot be achieved due to lot configuration, lack of access, or physical constraints, minimum density requirements may be reduced by the Reviewing Official. Phasing, shadow platting, or land reserves may be used to satisfy the minimum density requirements if the applicant can demonstrate that the current development would not preclude the provision of adequate access and infrastructure to fLiture development and would allow for the eventual H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\4-2-11OH leg.doc Page 2 of 4 satisfaction of minimum density requirements through future development. Within the Urban Center, surface parking may be considered a land reserve. 14. Adjacent is defined as "lots located across a street, railroad or right-of-way, except limited access roads." 15. Abutting is defined as "lots sharing common property lines." 16. The Reviewing Official may modify this provision, through the site development plan review process, where it is determined that specific portions of the required landscaping strip may be developed and maintained as a usable public open space with an opening directly to a public entrance. 17. The Reviewing Official may permit, through the site development plan review process, the substitution for the fifteen foot (15') wide landscaping strip, of a ten foot (10') wide landscaped setback and a sight-obscuring solid barrier wall (e.g., landscaping or solid fence), in order to provide reasonable access to the property. The solid barrier wall shall be deSigned in accord with the site development plan review section and shall be located a minimum of five feet (5') from abutting property(ies) zoned and or deSignated for "residential" use. The Reviewing Official may also modify the sight-obscuring landscaping provision, through the site development plan review process, if necessary to provide reasonable access to the property. A secured maintenance agreement or easement for the landscape strip is required. 18. The applicant must demonstrate to the Reviewing Official that the proposed development will: a. Be developed to standards equivalent to those requirements established in this chapter for yards, land areas, widths, setbacks and frontages, and b. Provide access and infrastructure to serve the development, equivalent to those requirements established in the subdivision regulations. 19. For existing parcels which are a maximum size of one half (1/2) acre, as of the effective date hereof, and which are proposed to be developed with townhouse development, an exemption from lot width or depth requirements may be permitted if the Reviewing Official determines that proposed alternative width standards are consistent with site development plan review section criteria. 20. Setbacks shall be measured consistent with the "yard requirement" in chapter 4-11 RMC, except in the case of "shadow lots," setbacks shall be measured from the "shadow lot lines" in the same manner as a conventionally subdivided lot. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\4-2-11OH leg.doc Page 3 of 4 21. "Public Suffix" (P) properties are allowed the following height bonus: Publicly owned structures shall be permitted an additional fifteen feet (1S') in height above that otherwise permitted in the zone if "pitched roofs," as defined herein, are used for at least sixty percent (60%) or more of the roof surface of both primary and accessory structures. In addition, in zones where the maximum permitted building height is less than seventy five feet (7S'), the maximum height of a publicly owned structure may be increased as follows, up to a maximum height of seventy five feet (7S') to the highest point of the building: a. When abutting a public street, one additional foot of height for each additional one and one half feet (1-1/2') of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum street setback required at street level unless such setbacks are otherwise discouraged (e.g., inside the Downtown Core Area in the CD Zone); b. When abutting a common property line, :one additional foot of height for each additional two feet (2') of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum required along a common property line; and c. On lots four (4) acres or greater, five (S) additional feet of height for everyone percent (1 %) reduction below a twenty percent (20%) maximum lot area coverage by buildings for public amenities such as recreational facilities; and/or landscaped open space areas, etc., when these are open and accessible to the public. 22. For self storage uses, rear and side yard setbacks shall comply with the Commercial Arterial Zone (CA) development regulations in RMC 4-2-120A, Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations. 23. For RM-U properties, perimeter street landscape strips may utilize a mix of hard surfaces, brick, stone, textured/colored concrete, and natural landscape elements, groundcover, shrubs and trees, to provide a transition between the public streetscape and the private development, subject to site plan review, RMC 4-9-20081, and the general and additional review criteria of RMC 4-9-200E1 and F1, F2, and F7. In no case shall living plant material comprise less than thirty percent (30%) of the required perimeter landscape strip. 24. Density bonus may allow up to one hundred (100) dwelling units per acre within the RM-U Zone located within the Urban Center Design Overlay and north of South 2nd Street pursuant to requirements in the RMC 4-9-06S. (Ord. 4736, 8-24-1998; Ord. 4"1;73, 3-22-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, S-13-2002; Ord. 4971, 6-10-2002; Ord. 498S, 10-14-2002; Ord. S028, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\4-2-11OH leg.doc Page 4 of 4 ,------------------- 4-2-120A ... 4-2-120A' DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS CN CN CV CA LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum Lot Size for lots 5,000 sq. ft. 5,QQQ SEl. ft.2@ 25,000 sq. ft.26 None, except 25,000 sq. ft. in created after July 11, 1993 the NE 4th District and 5,000 sq. ft. in the Sunset Corridor. - Minimum Lot Width/Depth None NeRe None None m for lots created after July 11, n m 1993 :::: LOT COVERAGE !!! Maximum Lot Coverage 65% of total lot area or a5% af tetal let aFsa aF 65% of total lot area or 75% if 65% of total lot area or 75°/:it' for Buildings 75% if parking is provided 75% if paFkiA§ is pFevises parking is provided within the parking is provided within the within the building or within 'Nitl=liA tAe l3~ilsiA§ eF witAiA building or within an on-site building or within an on-site 0 ~ » om c ~~ Ci') Os: N-"TIm ~ ~~ roo ~ .. a O~ ~ Zz Z Ci) an on-site parking garage. aA eA site paFkiA§ parking garage.26 parking garage. §aFa§e.26 DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units per Net Acre) Minimum Net Residential None ~ Q swelliR§ ~Rits PSF Ret 10 dwelling units per net acre. 10 dwelling units per net acre Density aGf&.-in the NE 4th Corridor and Sunset Corridor. Maximum Net Residential 4 dwelling units per ~ 5 s'NelliR§ ~Rits PSF Ret 20 dwelling units per net acre. 20 dwelling units per net DensityS structure. aGF&.-acre. Maximum Density within (;)istFist A (r;;!MG NA NA Suburban and 4 a Q95B4a aRsl3) Neighborhood Residential Yp te 6Q swslliR§ ~Rits PSF Bonus DistrictS RSt aSFS may I3s §FaRtss fSF pFsvisisR af: (a) mixes ~se pFajasts safiRes as a miRim~m SSptA sf aQ ft. sf ssmmeFsial ~ss eR tAS fiFst fieaF ef tAS pFimar:y 6tF~St~FS fasiR§ tAS aFtsFial, aRs (13) paFkiR§ sRslasss ~REleF SF -1- enGlosed within tho first floor ef the primary strUGture with either side or rear aGGess. DENSITY (Net Density in Dwelling Units per Net Acre) (Continued) SETBACKS Minimum Front Yard-1-8 DistriGt B (RMC 4 3 095B4a and b) A bonus fer arGhiteGtural innovatien may be approved up to a total of 36 dwelling units per net aGre through the modifiGation preGess ef RMC 4 3 OQ5E and the design Gritoria of RMC 4 Q 25QOO Distriet C (RMC 4 3 09684e) Up te 80 d'l .. elling units per net aGre may be granted for prevision ef: (a) a minimum depth ef ao ft. and a minimum length ef 60 ft. of Gommercial use on the first floor of the primary struGture, and (b) parking enGlosed under er enclosed within the first floor of the primary strUGtuFO. 10ft. The minimum 10ft. The minimum 10ft. The minimum setback setback may be reduced to setback may be reduGed to may be reduced to 0 ft. o ft. through the s~ite 0 ft. through the site through the site development development p.E.lan development plan review plan review process provided f£ieview process provided process provided blank blank walls are not located blank walls are not located walls are net leGated within within the reduced setback. within the reduced the roduGed setbaGk. setback. -2- 4-2-120A 10ft. The minimum setback may be reduced to 0 ft. through the site development plan review process provided blank walls are not located within the reduced setback. I-_ ;:.. • ,I 4-2-120A Maximum Front Yard+8 15ft.15 HifU9 15ft.15 None Minimum Side Yard Along 10ft. The minimum ~ 9 ft. +R9 FfliRiR:U:IFfl 10ft. The minimum setback 10ft. The minimum setback a Street+8 setback may be reduced to s9t9aek Fflay 99 r9sble9s t9 may be reduced to 0 ft. may be reduced to 0 ft. Oft. through the site 9 ft. tRFebl§R tRe site through the site development through the site development development plan review sevelel3Ff1eRt I3laR rel,<iew plan review process provided plan review process provided process provided blank I3reeess I3fevis9s 91aRI~ blank walls are not located blank walls are not located walls are not located within walls ar9 Ret leeat9s witRiR within the reduced setback. within the reduced setback. the reduced setback. tRe f9sble9s s9t9aGk. Minimum Freeway 10ft. landscaped setback ~ 9 ft. laRSSea139S s9t9aGk 10ft. landscaped setback 10ft. landscaped setback Frontage Setback from the property line. fFeFfl tR9 I3fel3eFty liR9. from the property line. from the property line. Minimum Rear Yard+8 None, except 15 ft. if lot ~JeRe, e*eel3t ~ 9 ft. if let None, except 15 ft. if lot abuts None, except 15 ft. if lot abuts abuts or is adjacent to a a9b1ts ef is asjaeoRt te a or is adjacent to a residential or is adjacent to a residential residential zone, RC, R-1, fOSisoRtial ~eRe, ~G, ~ ~, zone, RC, R-1, R-§1" R-8, R-zorie, RC, R-1, R-a~, R-8, R- R-§1" R-8, R-10, R-14, or ~ 9, R 8, ~ ~ 9, ~ 14, 9F 10, R-14, or RM-lE. 10, R-14, or RM-tE. RM-hE -RM-h None, except 15 ft. if lot NeRe, e*Gel3t 19ft. if let None, except 15 ft. if lot abuts None, except 15 ft. if lot abuts Minimum Side Yard18 abuts or is adjacent to a a9b1ts ef is asjaG9Rt te a or is adjacent to a residential or is adjacent to a residential residential zone, RC, R-1, fesiseRtial ~eRe, ~G, ~ 1, zone, RC, R-1, R-§1" R-8, R-zone, RC, R-1, R-~, R-8, R- R-5~, R-8, R-10, R-14, or R 5, ~ 8, ~ 10, ~ 14, 9F 10, R-14, or RM-hE~ 10, R-14, or RM-lE. RM-lF. ~M 1.26 Clear Vision Area In no case shall a structure IR Re Gase sRall a stfbletblfe In no case shall a structure In no case shall a structure over 42 in. in height evef 42 iR. iR Rei§At over 42 in. in height intrude over 42 in. in height intrude intrude into the 20 ft. clear iRtfblse iRte tAe 20 ft. sleaf into the 20 ft. clear vision area into the 20 ft. clear vision vision area defined in RMC visieR ama s9fiR9S iR ~MG defined in RMC 4-11-030. area defined in RMC 4-11- 4-11-030. 4 11 Oa9. 030. BUILDING LIMITATIONS Maximum Gross Floor 5,000 gross sq. ft. The a5,099 §fess sq. ft. +R9 66,990 §F9SS sq. ft. +Re 65,000 gross sg. ft. The Area of Any Single maximum size shall not be FflaxiFflblFfl si~e shall Ret 99 Ffla*iFflblFfl size shall not be maximum size shall not be exceeded except by e*Ge9S9S 9*Gel3t by e*Geeded e*Gel3t by exceeded excegt b~ Commercial Use on a Site conditional use permit.2,9 GeRditienal blS9 130rFflit.2,9 GensitieRal use 130fFflit.2,9 conditional use Qermit. These These restrictions do not +h9se FOStfiGtioRS se Ret +Aese restfiGti9RS se Ret restrictions do not aQI2I~ to apply to residential uses al3l3ly te FOsid9Rtiai US9S apl3ly te blses sblbj9Gt te Ret uses subject to net densit~ subject to net density subjeGt te Ret deRsity density liFflitatieRs iR tAe limitations in the Sunset limitations. liFflitatieRs. SblRset GeHideF aRs NE 3/4#1 Corridor and NE 3_41h GerrideF.None Corridor .NGA&.- Maximum Gross Floor 3,000 gross sq. ft.2+ The 36,009 §F9SS sq. ft. +Re 66,099 §Fess sq. n. +R9 None, except A .. ___ ", A_ •• C"I __ I_ "u: __ maximum size shall not be Ffla*iFflblFfl si~o sRall Ret SO Ffla*iFflblFfl size st:lall Ret 90 -3- J , 4·2·120A Area of Any Single Office exceeded except by exeee€lee exeet* 13'1 exeee€lee exeeFll 13'1 65,000 gross sq. ft. In the Use on a Site conditional use permit.2•g eeR€litieRal I;Ise FleFFRit. +Re eeRElitieRal I;Ise j3eFFRit. +l=ie Sunset and NE 4th Corridors, These restrictions do not tetal §F9SS sEll;laFe feeta§e tetal @Fess sEll;laFe feet~ the maximum size shall not apply to residential uses ef tRese I;Ises sAall Ret tRese !:Ises sRall Rst-ffi<-eeeG be exceeded except by subject to net density exeee€l 6f)%' sf tAe §FSSS 6f)%' sf tRe !3FSSS sEll;laFe conditional use permit. The limitations. sEll;laFe feeta!3e ef tRe feeta(3e ef tRe site.a,e +Rese total gross square footage of site.a,e +Rese FestFietieRs FestFietieRs €Ie Ret aJ3j3ly te these uses shall not exceed €Ie Ret aJ3j3ly te FesiseRtial FesiEleRtial I;Ises sl;Il3jeet te Ret 50% of the gross square I;Ises sl;lbjeet te Ret €IeRsity seRsity IiFRitatioRs.None footage of the site.2,9 These liFRitatieRs. restrictions do not apply to residential uses subject to net density limitations. Building Orientation All commercial uses shall NA NA NA have their primary entrance and shop display window oriented toward the street frontage. LANDSCAPING Minimum On-site 10ft., except where ~ f) ft., exeej3t 'NReFe 10ft., except where reduced· 10ft., except where reduced Landscape Width reduced through the site Fe91;1ees tRFOI;I!3R tRe site through the site development through the site development I Required Along the Street development plan review sevelej3FReRt j3laR review plan review process. plan review process. Frontage process. J3Feeess. I Minimum On-site 15 ft. wide sight-obscuring ~ 6 H. wise si!3At el3sel;lFiR!3 15 ft. wide landscape buffer is 15 ft. wide sight·obscuring I Landscape Width Along landscape strip.d;e laRsseaj3e stFij3.a,6 requireda-unless otherwise landscape strip.d,§ the Street Frontage If the street is a designated If tRe stFeet is a sesi§Rates determined by the Reviewing If the street is a designated Required When a principal arterial,1 non· J3FiReij3al aFteFial,~ ReR Official through the site principal arterial,1 non-sight- Commercial Lot is sight-obscuring si!3At el3ssl;IFiR!3 development plan review obscuring landscaping shall Adjacent8 to Property landscaping shall be laR€lssaj3iR§ sRall ge process. be provided unless otherwise Zoned Residential, RC, R-provided unless otherwise FlFe'.li€le€lI;lRless etReFwise determined by the Reviewing 1, R-6~, R-a, R-10, R-14, or determined by the €IeteFmiRe€ll3y tRe Official through the site RM Reviewing Official through ReviewiR!3 GUieial tRFel;l§A development plan review the site development plan tAe site sevelej3meRt j3laR process. review process. Fevie'N J3Fesess. Minimum Landscape 15 ft. wide landscaped ~ 6 ft. '.'lise laRsseaJ3es 15 ft. wide landscaped visual 15 ft. wide landscaped visual Width Required When a visual barrier consistent 'Jisl;lal 9aFFieF eeRsisteRt barrier consistent with the barrier consistent with the Commercial Lot is with the definition in RMC witA tRe €IefiRitieR iR RMC definition in RMC 4-11-120. A definitions in RMC 4-11-120. Abuttina7 to Prooertv 4-11-120. A 10 ft. sight-4 n ~2f).A~f)ft.6i§Rt 10ft. sight-obscuring A 10ft. sight·obscuring -4-.. .. ~) 4-2-120A Zoned Residential, Re, R-obscuring landscape strip el3sGblFiR§ laR9SGaJ3e stFiJ3 landscape strip may be landscape strip may be 1, R-a~, R-8, R-10, R-14, or may be allowed through FRay l3e allewe9 tRFebl§R allowed through the site allowed through the site RM the site development plan the site gelJeleJ3FReRt J3laR development plan review development plan review review process.3;4 Fe'Jiew J3FeGess.3,4 process.&4 process.&4 LANDSCAPING (Continued) Special Requirements for NA NA NA In the Green River Valley, an Properties Located within additional 2% of natural the Green River Valley landscaping shall be required Planning Area per the Soil Conservation Service Environmental Mitigation Agreement. These areas should not be dispersed throughout a site, but should be aggregated in one portion of the property. Where possible, the required 2% landscaping for adjacent properties should be contiguous. A drainage swale, planted with i vegetation suitable for I habitat, may be counted toward the 2% additional landscape requirement if the Reviewing Official determines that the proposed planting plan and swale design will function to meet the intent of these regulations, including but not limited to, that the facility slope and fencing design would not inhibit wildlife use. See RMC 4-4- 07006, Green River Valley Landscaping Requirements. HEIGHT Maximum Building Height, 35 ft. 35 tt. 26 50 ft. except when abutting 50 ft. except for Public uses with a In no case shall height '='iei8Rts FRalJ eXGee9 tRe lots zoned R-8, RMH, R-10, Heights may exceed the n"A n"'1 _ ... n"AI"" ... &....-_ - -5- "Public Suffix" (P) designation20 Maximum Height for Wireless ·Communlcation Facilities SCREENING Outdoor, Loading, Repair, Maintenance, Work, or Storage Areas; Surface- Mounted Utility and Mechanical Equipment; Roof Top Equipment (Except for Telecommunication Equipment) Refuse or Recyclables PARKING General PEDESTRIAN ACCESS exceed the limits specified in RMC 4-3-020. See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-095. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 10-10-13 and RMC 4-4-080. maximum height with a Conditional Use Permit.1 G In no oaso shall height exoeed the limits speoified in RMC 4 a 020. See RMC 4 4 140G. See RMC 4 4 095. See RMC 4 4 090 ISee RMC 10 10 13 and RMC 4 4 080.26 -6-. R-14, -RM-I,-or RM-GE, then 45 ft._2e . ted in RMC In the area deplo a ' 95840 in no case m , 14 a 0 , . I . hts of oommorGia , helg . d uso 'dontial or mlxe resl , buildings exoeed 45ft. maximum height for portions of property within 80 ft. of an R 8 or R 10 property line unless a modifioation through site development plan review proooss is requestod. Heights in other areas may exceed the maximum height '."lith a Conditional Use Permit.1G See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-095. See RMC 4-4-090. 4-2-120A maximum height with a Conditional Use Permit.+G In no case shall height exceed the limits specified in RMC 4-3-020. 35 feet in the Sunset Corridor and NE 4th Corridor. See RMC 4-4-140G. See RMC 4-4-095. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 10-10-13 and RMC Isee RMC 10-10-13 and RMC 4-4-08~ 4-4-080. •• 4-2-120A General A pedestrian connection A J'}eeestFiaA sSAAsstisA A pedestrian connection shall A pedestrian connection shall shall be provided from a sAall l3e J'}FsvieeEl fFSFA a be provided from a public be provided from a public public entrance to the J'}l.Il3lis eAtFaAse ts tAe entrance to the street, in entrance to the street, in street, in order to provide stFeet, iA sFEleF ts J'}FsviEle order to provide direct, clear order to provide direct, clear direct, clear and separate eiF8st, sleaF aAe s8J'}aFat8 and separate pedestrian and separate pedestrian pedestrian walks from Flee8stFiaA walks fFSFA walks from sidewalks to walks from sidewalks to sidewalks to building sieel,'Jalks t8 I3I.1i1eiA€I building entries and internally building entries and internally entries and internally from eAtFies aAEl iAteFAally fFSFA from buildings to abutting from buildings to abutting buildings to abutting retail I3I.1i1EliA€ls ts al3l.1ttiA€I Fetail retail properties, unless the retail properties, unless the properties, unless the FlFeJ'}eFties, I.IAless tAe Reviewing Official determines Reviewing Official determines Reviewing Official ~eviewiA€I GHisial that the requirement would that the requirement would determines that the eeteFFAiAes tRat tRe unduly endanger the unduly endanger the requirement would unduly FeEll.liFeFAeAt wSl.lle I.IAel:Jly pedestrian. pedestrian. endanger the pedestrian. eAeaA€lSF tAe J'}eeestFiaA. SIGNS General See RMC 4-4-100. See ~MC 4 4 100. See RMC 4-4-100. See RMC 4-4-100. LOADING DOCKS Location within Site See RMC 4-4-080. See ~MC 4 4 080. See RMC 4-4-080. See RMC 4-4-080. Shall not be permitted on SAall Ast l3e J'}eFFAittee SA Shall not be permitted on the Shall not be permitted on the the side of the lot adjacent tAe siee sf tAe 1st aEljaseAt side of the lot adjacent to or side of the lot adjacent to or to or abutting a residential ts SF al3l:JttiA€I a FesieeAtial abutting a residential zone, abutting a residential zone, zone, RC, R-1, R-&;1 R-8, WAe, ~C, ~ 1, R 5, R-8, RC, R-1, R-51, R-8, R-10, R-RC, R-1, R-54, R-8, R-10, R- R-10, R-14, or RM.~ R-10, R-14, or RM.3 14, or RM.3 14, RM-N, RM-C, or RM-tE.~ DUMPSTER/RECYCLING COLLECTION AREA Size and Location of See RMC 4-4-090. See ~MC 4 4 090. See RMC 4-4-090. See RMC 4-4-090. Refuse or Recycling Areas CRITICAL AREAS General ISee RMC 4-3-050. Isee ~MC 4 d 05~. ___ _1~eeR~C 4-3-050. Isee RMC 4-3-050. ---------------------------- (Ord. 4773, 3-22-1999; Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Ord. 4803,10-25-1999; Ord. 4851,8-7-2000; Ord. 4917, 9-17-2001; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002; Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003; Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) -7- .... ) ... 4-2-120C CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ... to be amended by the following revisions 4-2-120C CONDITIONS ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLES FOR COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATIONS 1. Includes principal arterials as defined by the Arterial Street Plan and depicted in RMC 4-2-0aOE. 2. The following table indicates the maximum requested size/standard change that may be allowed by conditional use permit. Increases above these levels may not be achieved by a variance or the conditional use permit process. . APPLICABLE STANDARD CHANGE REQUEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ZONE TYPE GGCN Uses restricted to 3,000 gross s.f. -H increases: Between 3,000 -5,000 s.f. max. GGCN Uses restricted to 5,000 gross s.f.-AD increases up to: 10% or 500 gross s.f. 20% or 1,000 gross s.f. H Uses restricted to 35,000 gross s.f. GN AG iRcfeases ll~ ,Ie: ~O% Elf 7,000 gf9SS sJ. 40% ef ~ 4 ,000 gfess sJ. -l=f ~CV Uses restricted to 65,000 gross s.f. -AD increases up to: 20% or 13,000 gross s.f. 40% or 26,000 gross s.f. H H = Hearing Examiner Conditional Use AD = Administrative Conditional Use 3. These provisions may be modified by the Reviewing Official through the site development plan review process where the applicant can show that the same or better result will occur because of creative design solutions, unique aspects or use, etc., that cannot be fully anticipated at this time. 4. Provided that a solid six foot (6') barrier wall is provided within the landscape strip and a maintenance agreement or easement for the landscape strip is recorded. A solid barrier wall shall not be located closer than 5' to an abutting lot zoned R-1, R-a1" R-a, R-10, R-14, or RM-~E. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-120C leg.doc Page lof7 I· 2 , 5. The Reviewing Official may modify the sight-obscuring provision in order to provide reasonable access to the property through the site development plan review process. 6. In no case shall building height exceed the maximum allowed by the Airport Related Height and Use Compatible Land UseRestrictions, for uses located within the Federal Aviation Administration Airport Zones designated under RMC 4-3-020. 7. Abutting is defined as "Lots sharing common property lines." 8. Adjacent is defined as "Lots located across a street, railroad or right-of-way, except limited access roads." 9. Use-related provisions are not variable. Use-related provisions that are not eligible for a variance include: building size, units per structure/lot, or densities. Unless bonus size or density provisions are specifically authorized, the modification of building size, units per structure, or densities requires a legislative change in the code provisions and/or a Comprehensive Plan amendment/rezone. 10. Heights may exceed the maximum height under Hearing Examiner conditional use permit. In consideration of a request for conditional use permit for a building height in excess of ninety five feet (95') the Hearing Examiner shall consider the following factors in addition to the criteria in RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, among all other relevant information: a. Location Criteria: Proximity of arterial streets which have sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic generated by the development. Developments are encouraged to locate in areas served by transit. b. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the City. c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: Buildings in excess of ninety five feet (95') in height at the proposed location shall not result in substantial or . undue adverse effects on adjacent property. When a building in excess of ninety five feet (95') in height is adjacent to a lot deSignated residential on the City Comprehensive Plan, then setbacks shall be equivalent to the requirements of the adjacent residential zone. d. Bulk: Buildings near public open spaces should permit public access and, where feasible, physical access to the public open space. Whenever practicable, buildings should be oriented to minimize the shadows they cause on publicly accessible open space. e. Light and Glare: Due consideration shall be given to mitigation of light and glare impacts upon streets, major public facilities and major public open spaces. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-120C leg.doc Page 2 of7 11. See RMC 4-2-080C. 12. Heights may exceed the maximum height by up to fifty feet (50') with bonuses for plazas and other amenities, subject to a Hearing Examiner's conditional use permit. . 13. A reduced minimum setback of no less than fifteen feet (15') may be allowed for structures in excess of twenty five feet (25') in height through the site development plan review process. 14. Additional height may be allowed via the site development plan review process; provided, the applicant can demonstrate provision of any of the following sigl)ificant public benefits: a. Provision of continuous pedestrian .access to the shoreline consistent with requirements of the Shoreline Management Act and fitting a circulation pattern within the site; b. Provision of five (5) affordable units per fifty (50) units, which meet the provisions of the housing element of the Comprehensive Plan; c. Provision of an additional twenty five foot (25') setback from the shoreline above that required by the Shoreline Regulations; d. Establishment of view corridors from upland boundaries of the site to the shoreline; e. Establishment of water related uses. If the applicant wishes to reach these bonus objectives in a different manner, a system of floor area ratios may be established for the property to be determined at the time of site development plan review. Furthermore, the Master Plan review must address the impact of this height on . the neighboring area and mitigate these impacts. 15. The maximum setback may be modified by the Reviewing Official through the site development plan review process if the applicant can demonstrate that the site development plan meets the following criteria: a. Orients development to the pedestrian through such measures as providing pedestrian walkways beyond those required by the Renton Municipal Code (RMC), encouraging pedestrian amenities and supporting alternatives to single occupant vehicle (SOV) transportation; and b. Creates a low scale streetscape through such measures as fostering distinctive architecture and mitigating the visual dominance of extensive and unbroken parking along the street front; and c. Promotes safety and visibility through such measures as discouraging the creation of hidden spaces, minimizing conflict between pedestrian H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-120C leg.doc Page 3 of7 & .------ and traffic and ensuring adequate setbacks to accommodate required parking and/or access that could notbe provided otherwise. Alternatively, the Reviewing Official may also modify the maximum setback requirement if the applicant can demonstrate that the preceding criteria cannot be met; however, those criteria which can be met shall be addressed in the site development plan; d. Due to factors including but not limited to the unique site design requirements or physical site constraints such as critical areas or utility easements the maximum setback cannot be met; or e. One or more of the above criteria would not be furthered or would be impaired by compliance with the maximum setback; or f. Any function of the use which serves the public health, safety or welfare would be materially impaired by the required setback. 16. The following height requests may be made: APPLICABLE HEIGHT CHANGE REQUEST CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ZONE TYPE GN EXGeeg Rei€lRI lay less IRaA 20 feel AI) EXGeeS Rei€lRI lay m9f9 IRaA 20 feel -M GSCV Exceed height of 50 feet AD Exceed height of 45 feet when abutting R·S or H R-10 Zone CA Exceed height of 50 feet H H = Hearing Examiner AD = Administrative Conditional Use In consideration of a request for conditional use permit for additional building height the Reviewing Official shall consider the following factors in addition to the criteria in RMC 4-9-030, Conditional Use Permits, among all other relevant information. a. Location Criteria: Proximity of arterial streets which have sufficient capacity to accommodate traffic generated by the development. Developments are encouraged to locate in areas served by transit. b. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed use shall be compatible with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the Comprehensive Plan, the zoning regulations and any other plan, program, map or regulation of the City. c. Effect on Adjacent Properties: Buildings height shall not result in substantial or undue adverse effects on adjacent property. When a building in excess of the maximum height is proposed adjacent to or abuts a lot designated R-1, R-{)1, R-8, R-10, R-14 or RM-D. then the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-120C leg.doc Page 4 of7 ------------------------------------------~~ .... , .. setbacks shall be equivalent to the requirements of the adjacent residential zone if the setback standards exceed the requirements of the Commercial Zone. 17. Heights may exceed the maximum height under Hearing Examiner Conditional Use Permit. 18. Allowed Projections into Setbacks: a. Steps, and decks having no roof and being not over forty two inches (42") high may be built within a front yard setback. b. Eaves and cornices may project up to twenty four inches (24") into any required setback. c. Accessory buildings when erected so that the entire building is within a distance of thirty feet (30') from the rear lot line may also occupy the side yard setback of an inside lot line. d. Where below-grade structures are permitted to have zero front yard/street setbacks, structural footings may minimally encroach into the public right-of-way, subject to approval of the Board of Public Works (see chapter 2-3 RMC, Board of Public Works). 19. Except with approved Master Plan review. 20. "Public Suffix" (P) properties are allowed the following height bonus: Publicly owned structures shall be permitted an additional fifteen feet (15') in height above that otherwise permitted in the zone if "pitched roofs," as defined herein, are used for at least sixty percent (60%) or more of the roof surface of both primary and accessory structures. In addition, in zones where the maximum permitted building height is less than seventy five feet (75'), the maximum height of a publicly owned structure may be increased as follows, up to a maximum height of sventy five feet (75') to the highest point of the building: a. When abutting a public street, one additional foot of height for each additional one and one half feet (1-1/2') of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum street setback required at street level unless such setbacks are otherwise discouraged (e.g., inside the Downtown Core Area in the GG-UC-O Zone); and b. When abutting a common property line, one additional foot of height for: each additional two feet (2') of perimeter building setback beyond the· minimum required along a common property line; and c. On lots four (4) acres or greater, five (5) additional feet of height for everyone percent (1 %) reduction below a twenty percent (20%) maximum lot area coverage by buildings for public amenities such as recreational facilities, and/or landscaped open space areas, etc., when these are open and accessible to the public during the day or week: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-I;20C leg.doc Pqe5~7 . ••. ,----~ i 21. Except for existing, legal administrative headquarters offices, pursuant to RMC 4-2-080A17. 22. COR 3 Zone Upper Story Setbacks: Buildings or portions of buildings which exceed fifty feet (50') in height which are located within one hundred feet (100') of a shoreline shall include upper story setbacks for the facade facing the shoreline and for facades facing publicly accessible plazas as follows: The minimum setback for a fifth story and succeeding stories shall be ten feet (10') minimum from the preceding story, applicable to each story. Projects not meeting the upper story setbacks defined above may be approved through the modification process when superior design is demonstrated pursuant to RMC 4-9-2500. For a modification to be granted, the project must also comply with the decision and design criteria stipulated in RMC 4-9-25002 and 04. 23. Within the GO-UC-O Zone, perimeter street landscape strips may utilize a mix of hard surfaces, brick, stone, textured/colored concrete, and natural landscape elements, groundcover, shrubs and trees, to provide a transition between the public streetscape and the private development, subject to Site Plan review, RMC 4-9-200B1, and the general and additional review criteria of RMC 4-9-200E1 and F1, F2, and F7. In no case shall living plant material comprise less than thirty percent (30%) of the required perimeter landscape strip. 24. In COR 3, where the applicable Shoreline Master Program setback is less than fifty feet (50'), the City may increase the setback up to one hundred percent (100%) if the City determines additional setback area is needed to assure adequate public access, emergency access or other site planning or environmental considerations. 25. COR-3 Modulation/Articulation Requirements: Buildings that are immediately adjacent to or abutting a public park, open space, or trail shall incorporate at least one of the features in items a. through c. and shall provide item d.: a. Incorporate building modulation to reduce the overall bulk and mass of buildings; or b. Provide at least one architectural projection for each dwelling unit of not less than two feet (2') from the wall plane and not less than four feet (4') wide; or c. Provide vertical and horizontal modulation of roof lines and facades of a minimum of two feet (2') at an interval of a minimum of forty feet (40') on a building face or an equivalent standard which adds interest and quality to the project; and d. Provide building articulation and textural variety. 26. For residential or mixed use projects in overlay areas, also see RMC ~ 0950. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2-120C leg.doc Page 6 of7 ----------------------------------------~--... ~ ... ':; , " (Grd. 1472,2181953; Ord. 1905,8151961; Ord. 4404,6 7'1993; O~d. 4593, 4 1 1996; Ord. 4773, 3 22 1999; Ord. 4802, 10 25 1999; Ord. 4803, 10 25 1999; Ord. 4854,8 14 2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5 132002; Ord. 5028,11 24 2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-2·)20C leg.doc Page? of? ). DEVELOPMENT JlLANNlNG , CITY OF RENT"'" AUG '2 6 200~ 4-3-020 to be amended by adding the following revisions 4-3-020AIIilECS'V6&ED HEIGHT AND COMPATIBLE LAND USE RESTRICTIONS: A. APPROAGH,-T-RANSI+ION,AND-T-tJRNJNG-Z-ONE-SAIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA ESTABLISHED: In order to regulate the use of property in the vicinity of the airport, all of the land within Safety Zones 1 through 6 of the Renton Airport shall be known as the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection €-Eof this Section. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) B. HEIGHT LIMITS: Except as otherwise provided in this Code, no structure or tree shall penetrate the Federal Aviation Regulation Part 77 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace, as shown in subsection f-~ofthis Section. (Ord.1542, 4-17-1956; Ord.1829, 5-17-1960; Amd. Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) C. USE RESTRICTIONS: 1) Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Code, no use may be made of land within Airport Safety Zones 1 through 4, as shown in subsection E of this Section, in such a manner as to create electrical interference with radio communication between the airport and aircraft, making it difficult for fliers to distinguish between airport lights and others, result in glare in the eyes of fliers using the airport, impair visibility in the vicinity thereof, or otherwise endanger the landing, taking off, or maneuvering of aircraft. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) 2) Places of public assembly in the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section, may be conditioned in terms of frequency of use, time of use, and number of people assembled. 3) Residential uses may be conditioned in relation to residential density in the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section. 4) Non-residential uses may be conditioned in relation to intensity of use in the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section. 5) Bird attractants and uses that produce smoke, dust, glare, vapor, gasses or other emissions may be restricted in the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section. 6) Noise-sensitive uses shall be prohibited from locating within the 65 DNL (or higher) noise contour of the Renton Municipal Airport, as shown in SUbsection H of this Section. D. HAZARD MARKING AND LIGHTING: Any permit or variance granted as provided in this Section and affecting Airport Safety Zones 1 through 4, as shown in subsection €-Eof this Section, shall be so conditioned as to require the owner of the structure or tree in question to install, operate and maintain thereon, at owner's own expense, such markers and lights as may be necessary to give adequate notice to aircraft of the presence of such airport hazard. (Ord. 1542,4-17-1956; Amd. Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) E. SAFETY VERIFICATION AND NOTIFICATION: 1) Land Use Permit Master Applications for proposed projects to be located within the Airport Influence Area shall require one of the following: a, A certificate from an engineer or land surveyor, that clearly states that the proposed use will not penetrate the Federal Aviation Administration Regulation Part 77 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace (4-3-020B), or -1- 4-3-020 to be amended by addingth'e following revisions b, The maximum elevation of proposed buildings or structures based on the established airport elevation reference datum will not penetrate the Federal Aviation Administration Regulation Part 77 Objects Affecting Navigable Airspace (4-3-0208), Elevations shall be determined by an engineer or land surveyor. 2) Within the Airport Influence Area, as shown in SUbsection F of this Section, disclosure notice shall be placed on land title when property is subdivided, or as part of approval of conditional use permits, special use permits, building permits, or other SEPA non-exempt projects. Such notice may relate to noise, low overhead flights, aviation operations that create high levels of noise, or aviation operations at night when there is greater sensitivity to noise. 3) Prior to approval of residential land use or other land uses where noise-sensitive activities may occur within the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section, an avigation easement shall be granted to the City of Renton. The avigation easement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to recording. 4) Prior to approval of land uses where aviation overflight may occur within the Airport Influence Area, as shown in subsection F of this Section, an avigation easement shall be granted to the City of Renton. The avigation easement shall be approved by the City Attorney prior to recording. 5) Applicants for projects located within the Airport Influence Area shall submit description of construction and construction schedule prior to issuance of building permits to prevent construction equipment, such as cranes, from penetrating the airspace without prior notification to responsible parties. -2- \. .. ;---- 4-3-020 to be amended by adding the following revisions ~E." AIRPORT INFLUENCE AREA MAP: ',. !:'.::--.: I' ,., : .. /~~'-::."~ ::V"--7~~< .. :;.~-:-;-<r.~·-..~~:-.. ~_,~:.--.. -- ,~;: ~ ~~::~3!~~~#:;~~b~~, ' . ~"JlJ' " ~I ~,-'2::~~~~-r ---);--JI~ !::F.;~--~i ! \:: .. "---.~:;~; ';:.:.;,,:;; 1-=-~)'~2\, "=":~-=~·:t~r~~~:~-# .. · .. ,'\.,.".,, ...... ~'''' __ :1 .l.. '0:< :,,,.; 'dl .,11£0 J .jL . ..;} U,.. ... .,''''-'''', .... :{S~~;":\I~~~~j~§~I[t:.,~\r..,~_Xlt><l~~~3 ~;' ,.~ ,jL"~!1 :!.::--~~~t ~.~®[~ ~lI~.;:;-:. ': i' '! !:i -!i f ~r-,I ~ --~s Ill:i.!, L::tt 111~. : 'rl ~-;::.:: ;~ / .•.• :.> .'..~:~",~ .. :~,,,'t: ~-, . ,', ~I ", . ,I '11 ;j' : ~'\jJl:]l;; .:flIJ'-~!:;I" '''1l' J' •• "'".,..../1" .... " I '·!!.!Ih.aL· ',."----r.: -I "1 ; Li· .. ·J'~ ·L; _:.~" ~t~ -~L~..;-~~~e\ ~ , .. ~ i><Y~Dr.:ACK)t\ll(H~::?!: ',1'. .t·I-:-:._~<; \ '.::;.,:, : :/I~I~,,,: .f' ~ ,,:,,::'!I-.:v:f::~i-t:·. • .~.I . ., ,:;)" 1 7a""; (';J:;I'>!I , . ..,. ~;:;... $" -.11 "'l~""~' ~~.I f~~-~ ,,'-', ',",-'I'c", ~r ' ;,,1, :'1,[1 ':0'1 I '. J "''''H' J" I J".', J~ "" .... 11' ';i··-::;:;,,"'''~-''--:-....::''.".t'-;r ;-~:::-..::::~:--,_I -:' ':"; I-d': i(:A .",,:.'.:.~,-;: I.' '-'S'J~i<.~'-·'~'1 3G-sm1ll o~"-"," ~-JI£"""-""'/. .r t~ .;f.;L-._,.!o:'(~-:'~~!~~ t.", ,,1;..-. \', ~»~111~:~1~1l-~~~Q)($< .. -.-_ .. _.,"'...... .,~' "'':' "<:-~r'-; -'::~"; ..;! " ~/ ~l II" '-1i"'/"',>-'~~ ·~~~'~y~~~~~~~~~mfu~r~ ~,-;:~~~,l~~!~~~,::~,~~lt·~ i. "-j; :J i '.".:;~~-::.~ ", ,< :;::.:::.: ...... ~ -.:t ~.';-~ "t., :to .y-r.,". :: __ ~:~ ",'. l}l.:-.:; :j :. ·1 .,.:~I~::=~I:~:~f·ii-~--lr~,.1 i-·I---'·~'·-22---·::·-B:-~~~~r.~1tn "I' 'I~I )1 'j ,; ;/ ! i ~II~~ 3'j2rn~~n5()p. .:,i .... -.... ~~.w4d~~~iU.;"'~ },~t. ~,l:-:'.~.'.:'.:, .. ' :~ .. :.\lir:_Jil~~f:; 'j, t\:.:~.',~.·~.~,;,',.. ":~~(r~~ [(;'-:~if£~ \) } lE2 . -I .--... ___ )ri.f:...~ .. _-.::...._,i.~,;,: ... :.:.:=.:.,.'.~ .• :,.L.'·.:-:_;,,·:;.·::_:~.· .. I_.:. :;/ .' ';1' '.' ': '1 ~:II~ ::~~ 1; / ':U,p.,,;,: "-'---0_' _ , ;.~· ... I.;.::-::-·""C-''',;:,'';.'I·, )' ~'I <" "-j'--". ",_ . ~ ,',;: 'f' if ' ..•. ,. • ••. 1)m!'.lL".: .. T!8_,~'_j1lS<1. i _~:""""",,,lI'on,n.ruo'" I T~!kai"\ ~tJCaihuu.a..w.--.!.::~ Area r;;I Airp;>1 ~nfi:l.: Lan<ll~ PfOII'OIlI AteaR~~affid by Ren!cn l~.lID;iJlil! CilOt ".Nrpon R&Ia1!!d Haigh! and 1Iw RiI$llitIO's" -3- Accident Safety Zones CD Runway Protection Zone @)Outer Safety Zooe @ Inner Safety Zone I:§)Sicfeline Safety Zone @lnnerTurning Zone @TrafficPattem Zone (60 degree sector) ----------------------------------~----...... (. (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) 4-3-020 to be amended by adding the following revisions f:G. FEDERAL AVIATION REGULATION PART 77 OBJECTS AFFECTING NAVIGABLE AIRSPACE: (Ord. 5029, 11-24-03) Not 10 Scale ~-----. Translllonal Surface r-----Predsion Instrument Approach Swface r-----" Horizontal SUrface I ~~!~~~=ci_~ __ ....J_'___ I -4- Conical Surface - Primary Surface -'---1._J Jrvm: Dt:m'n' ReJ,.JjonaJ CCMIJd/ Q/~mt'!nl~~ .<Cirpml O)mptulblC! LunJ U.u~ J)t1flgll IfcJlhfhooi .. ----- 4-3-020 to be amended by adding the following revisions H. RENTON MUNICIPAL AIRPORT ANNUAL AVERAGE NOISE EXPOSURE (2015) t.· ~. \~1~~':;""-75 DNL p.~~ Renton Municipal Airport I .. ',:tft~~ p,nnulil,lVemge noise exposure for year 2015 a ":::""'~""i!" .... , .• ,,..,. I.I'.·,~~ ..... \ .... , ..... ·nr·, .... '·'n· ....... ·.· ... if ....... n "'·I".~r 00 ~N"t .,',"" c' ," ;1,","""" ,".1.'." rHi" .'1;1, "", ,\"" ''''~''' A.,"v,,, A"""., !,'" 7. Cily Limits -5- 'j DEVELOPMENT PLA .... CITY OF RENTON AUG "2 6" 2004 RECEIVED 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing 4-3-040 CORRIDOR COMMERCIAL BUSINESS DESIGNATIONS: A. PURPOSE: These regulations are intended to establish regulatory districts within the Corridor Commercial Comprehensive Plan designation where additional land use and site planning requirements will make the commercial environment more attractive, improve the City's tax base, and result in a more successful business district. B. APPLICABILITY: 1. Renton Auto Mall District a. Auto Mall Area A: That area bounded by Grady Way S. on the north, Rainier Avenue S. (SR-167) on the east, 1-405 on the south, and Seneca Avenue S. on the west, and That area bounded by S.W. Grady Way on the north, Raymond Avenue S.W. on the west, Seneca Avenue SW. on the east, and the alley midway between SW. Grady and SW 12th Street, on the south. b. Auto Mall Area B: That area along the south side of S.W. Grady defined by the alley between SW. Grady Way and S.W. 12th Street, on the north, Seneca Avenue S.W. on the east, and Raymond Avenue S.W. on the west, and 1-405 on the south; That area along the south side of SW. Grady Way west of Raymond Avenue S. between S.W. Grady Way on the north, Raymond Avenue S. on the east, a north/south line approximately four hundred feet (400') east of Raymond Avenue SW. on the west, and 1-405 on the south; That area along the north side of S.W. Grady Way west of Lind Avenue S. bounded by S.W. Grady Way on the south, Oakesdale Avenue S.W. on the west, S.W. 10th Street on the north, and Lind Avenue S.W. on the east; That area along the north side of S.W. Grady Way between Lind Avenue to the west and Rainier Avenue S. on the east. Beginning at a point approximately four hundred feet (400') north of S.W. Grady Way along the east side of Lind Avenue S.W. on the west, then east for a distance of approximately three hundred twenty five feet (325'), then south to a point approximately one hundred eighty feet (180') north of SW. Grady Way, then east from this point parallel to S.W. Grady Way to a point approximately ninety feet (90') west of Rainier Avenue S., then north from this point approximately Sixty feet (60'), then west approximately fifty feet (50'), and then north approximately two hundred fifteen feet (215') and then east approximately one hundred sixty feet (160') to Rainier Avenue S. on the east; That area north of South 7th Street and west of Hardie Avenue generally described as the area beginning at the northwest corner of South 7th -1- \ . .! 4-3-040 entire sec~ion replace~ existing Street and Hardie Avenue S. and then proceeding west approximately four hundred twenty five feet {425'}, then north approximately four - hundred fifty feet (450') to the southern edge of the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way, then east along the railroad ROW approximately two hundred thirty five feet {235'} to Hardie Avenue and then south along Hardie Avenue to the beginning point; That area north of South 7th Street between Hardie Avenue on the west, the Burlington Northern Railroad right-of-way on the north, and Rainier Avenue on the east; That area north of South 7th Street between Rainier Avenue S. on the west, a line approximately one hundred ninety feet (190') north of and parallel to South 7th Street on the north, and Shattuck Avenue S. on the east; The triangular area on the south side of South 7th Street between Hardie Avenue on the west and Rainier Avenue on the east; The larger area north of S. Grady Way between Rainier Avenue on the west and Shattuck Avenue S. on the east between South 7th Street on the north and S. Grady Way on the south; That area north of S. Grady Way between Shattuck Avenue S. on the west, the northern edge of the former railroad right-of-way approximately one hundred fifty feet {150'} north of S. Grady Way, and Talbot Road/Smithers Avenue S. on the east; That area along the south side of S. Grady Way between SR-167/Rainier Avenue S. on the west and a north/south line approximately one thousand six hundred thirty feet (1,630') east of SR-167 on the east, S. Grady Way on the north, and on the southwest along' S. Renton Village Place approximately one hundred seventy five feet (175') to the 1998 zoning boundary between the CA Z0l!e and the CO Zone on the south; and That area along the south side of S. Grady Way east of Talbot Road bounded by Talbot Road on the west, S. Grady Wayan the northwest, Renton City Hall on the north/northeast, Benson Road S. on the easVsoutheast, and the 1-405 right-of-Way on the south. {Amd. Ord. 4839,5-8-2000} 2. Sunset Boulevard Business Corridor: That area along NE Sunset Blvd. from east of Duvall Ave. NE to west of Union Ave. NE. 3. Northeast Fourth Business Corridor: That area along NE 3rd Street and Monroe Ave NE on the west and NE 4th Street east of Duvall Ave NE on the east. 4. Rainier Ave. Busines Corridor: The area north of south 2nd Street on the north and the Houser railroad trestle on the south to the Renton Automall District. -2- 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing C. USES PERMITTED IN AUTO MALL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT: The following use provisions take precedence over the underlying zoning: USES ALLOWED IN AREA A Only the following uses are permitted within Auto Mall Area A Within the CA Zone: Auto, motorcycle, snowmobile, lawn and garden equipment, and passenger truck sales; Secondary uses including: Licensing bureaus, car rentals, public parking, and other uses determined by the Zoning Administrator to directly support dealerships; Within the 1M Zone: Auto, motorcycle, snowmobile, lawn and garden equipment, passenger truck sales, and existing office; Secondary uses including: Licensing bureaus, car rentals, public parking, off-site parking consistent with RMC 4-4-080E.2 and other uses determined by the Zoning Administrator to directly support dealerships. USES ALLOWED IN AREA B All uses permitted by the underlying zoning D. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR USES LOCATED WITHIN AUTO MALL IMPROVEMENT ,DISTRICTS -AREAS A AND B: All permitted uses in Area A and all auto sales and related uses in Area B of the Auto Mall Improvement District shall comply with the following development standards: ALL USES IN AREA A AND NON·DEALERSHIPS AND DEALERSHIPS AND RELATED USES IN AREA B RELATED USES IN AREA B SERVICE AREA Service areas shall not face Service areas shall not face ORIENTATION public street ,frontage. public street frontage. A 15-foot-wide landscape strip along these street frontages. LANDSCAPING -This frontage requirement is in STREET lieu of the frontage requirement FRONTAGE listed for the zone in chapter 4-2 LANDSCAPING RMC. Pursuant to landscaping REQUIREMENTS Unimproved portions of the right- requirements listed in chapter 4- for lots which abut ~ RMC (requirements for the Lind Avenue S.W., of-way may be used in underlying zone) and chapter 4- S.w. Grady Way, combination with abutting private ~RMC. Talbot Road S. (SR-property to meet the required 515) and Rainier 15-foot landscape strip width. Avenue S. The landscaping shall include a minimum 30-inch high berm and red maoles (Acer rubrum) -3- planted 25 feet on center. 2.5% of the gross site area shall be provided as on-site landscaping. Landscaping shall LANDSCAPING -be consolidated and located at MINIMUM AMOUNT site entries, building fronts, or AND LOCATION other visu;3l1y prominent locations as approved through the site plan review process. If frontage landscaping is relocated, then permanent wheel stops or continuous curbs must be installed a minimum of 2.5 feet from sidewalks to prevent WHEEL STOPS bumper overhang of sidewalks. Where these requirements differ from the re,quirements of the parking, loading and driveway regulations of chapter 4-4 RMC, these requirements shall govern. Customer parking shall be deSignated and striped near entry drives and visible from public streets. Where possible, customer parking shall be CUSTOMER combined with adjacent PARKING dealership customer parking and shared access. Where these requirements differ from the requirements of the parking, loading and driveway regulations of chapter 4-4 RMC, these requirements shall govern. Once completed, all development shall coordinate AUTO MALL with a right-of-way improvement RIGHT-OF-WAY plan. A right-of-way IMPROVEMENT improvement plan shall be PLAN completed by the City in COORDINATION coordination with adjacent property own~rs, and shall address gateways, signage, landscaping, and shared access. All development shall coordinate AUTO MALL with the Auto Mall Improvement IMPROVEMENT Plan adopted by Resolution No. PLAN COMPLIANCE 3182. The plan addresses potential street vacations, right- of-wav imorovements. area -4- 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing Pursuant to landscaping requirements listed in chapter 4- £ RMC (requirements for the underlying zone) and chapter 4- 4RMC. If frontage landscaping is relocated, then permanent wheel stops or continuous curbs must be installed a minimum of 2.5 feet from sidewalks to prevent bumper overhang of sidewalks. Where these requirements differ from the requirements of the parking, loading and driveway regulations of chapter 4-4 RMC, these requirements shall govern. Customer parking shall be deSignated and striped near entry drives and visible from public streets. Where possible, customer parking shall be combined with adjacent dealership customer parking and shared access. Where these requirements differ from the requirements of the parking, loading and driveway regulations of chapter 4-4 RMC, these requirements shall govern. Once completed, all development shall coordinate with a right-of-way improvement plan. A right-of-way improvement plan shall be completed by the City in coordination with adjacent property owners, and shall address gateways, signage, landscaping, and shared access. All development shall coordinate with the Auto Mall Improvement Plan adopted by Resolution No. 3182. The plan addresses potential street vacations, right- of-wav imorovements. area gateways, signage, landscaping, circulation, and shared access. MODIFICATIONS 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing gateways, sign age, landscaping, circulation, and shared access. Where full compliance with these provisions would create a hardship for existing uses undergoing major modifications, the Zoning Administrator may modify them. Hardship for existing uses may result from existing lot coverage, existing siting of buildings, etc., which preclude full compliance. E. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR USES LOCATED WITHIN SUNSET BLVD, NORTHEAST FOURTH AND RAINIER AVENUE BUSINESS CORRIDORS. 1. Sunset Corridor: Reserved. 2. Northeast Fourth Corridor: a. Maximum front setback of 15 feet along the principal arterials. b. Provision of a public plaza abutting the sidewalk along the arterial of no less than 1,000 sq. ft. with a minimum dimension of 20 feet on one side. A landscape plan shall be required for the public plaza showing at a minimum street trees, decorative paving pedestrian scaled lighting and seating. c. For parcels that are not fully developed designate appropriate area for future pad development to occur in later phases. d. The number of parking spaces provided for uses within the corridor designation is limited to the minimum requirement. 3. Rainier Corridor: a. Consolidate access points to properties. b. Remove billboards. c. Freestanding signs are restricted to monument signs. d. Sidewalk width at the intersection of Rainier Ave. and Sunset Blvd/South Third Street, Rainier Ave. and South Third Place and Rainier Ave. and South Fourth Place of ten (10) feet, minimum. e. Maximum setback of 15 ft .. Building setback for a primary use may exceed the maximum provided that a designated area for a future pad deelopment that will conform to the maximum setback is established through a recorded document. -5- 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing f. The number of parking spaces provided for uses within the district is limited to the minimum requirement. F. POTENTIAL WAIVER OF STREET VACATION FEES FOR DEALERSHIPS LOCATED WITHIN AREA A: All street vacation fees and compensation for the right-of-way may be waived by Council for developing properties in Area A, provided: 1. The properties are designated to be vacated on the Auto Mall Improvement Plan Map, 2. The application for street vacation conforms to RMC 9-14-10, Administrative Procedure for Right-of-Way Vacations, and 3. The uses proposed conform to subsection C of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4749,10-19-1998) -6- G. Maps of Auto Mall Overlay Districts: 4-3-040 entire section replaces existing Automall Improvement Districts F;.;.;.;.;.;j Area A ~ AreaB (Ord. 4839, 5-8-2000) -7- .1 .1 -- 4-3-050G NATIVE GROWTH PROTECTION AREAS to be amended by the following revisions 1. When Required: A flt:!,ative gGrowth f:},Erotection aArea may be required by subsections H to M of this Section in order to protect a critical area from any proposed development for a non-exempt activity. 2. Standards: a. Trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained in designated At:!,ative gGrowth f:},Erotection aAreas. b. Activities allowed in a flt:!,ative gGrowth f:},Erotection aAreas shall be consistent with applicable critical area regulations. c. The City may require enhancement of flt:!,ative gGrowth f:},Erotection a6reas to improve functions and values, reduce erosion or landslide potential, or to meet another identified purpose of this section or of the critical area regulations. 3. Method of Creation: Native gGrowth f:},Erotection aAreas shall be established by one of the following methods, in order of preference: a. Conservation Easement: The permit holder shall, subject to the City's approval, convey to the City or other public or nonprofit entity specified by the City, a recorded easement ·for the protection of the critical area and/or its buffer. b. Protective Easement: The permit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable easement on the property title of a parcel or tract of land containing a critical area and/or its buffer created as a condition of a permit. Such protective easement shall be held by the current and future property owner, shall run with the land, and shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the easement except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over such activity. c. Tract and Deed Restriction: The permit holder shall establish and record a permanent and irrevocable deed restriction on the property title of any critical area management tract or tracts created as a condition of a permit. Such deed restriction(s) shall prohibit development, alteration, or disturbance within the tract except for purposes of habitat enhancement as part of an enhancement project which has received prior written H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-050G leg.doc Page 1..Q[2 ... : ~~: approval from the City, and from any other agency with jurisdiction over, " I such activity. . 4. Marking During Construction: The location of the outer extent of the critical area buffer and areas not to be disturbed pursuant to an approved permit shall be marked with barriers easily visible in the field to prevent unnecessary disturbance by individuals and equipment during the development or construction of the approved activity. :; , 5. Signage Required: The common boundary between a RNative gGrowth J:)J:rotection a,8rea and the adjacent land must be permanently identified. This identification shall include permanent wood, plastic, or metal sigtlS ,on treated wood or metal posts. Sign 109ations, materials, and size specificafions shall be approved by the City. Suggested wording is as follows: "Protection of this natural area is in your care. Alteration or disturbance is prohibited by law." 6, Responsibility for Maintenance: Responsibility for maintaining the RNative §Growth J:)J:rotection Areaeasements or tracts shall be held by a R.t!.omeowners' a,8ssociation, adjacent lot owners, the permit applicant or designee, or other appropriate entity, as approved by the City. , 7. Maintenance and Maintenance Note Required: The following note shall appear on the face of all plats, short plats, PUDs, or other approved site plans containing recorded separate nNative gGrowth J:)J:rotection Area easements or tracts, and shall also be recorded as a covenant running with the land on the title of record for all affected lots on the title: "MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY: All owners of lots created by or benefiting from this City action abutting or including a RNative §Growth J:).Erotection Area easement [tract] are responsible for maintenance and protection of the easement [tract]. Maintenance includes Qtnsuring that no alterations occur within the tract and that all vegetation remains undisturbed unless the express written authorization of the City has been received," H:\EDNSP\CoI1lP Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-050G leg.doc Page 2J2f.2 ' Nl .. ~NN'NG OE\I~~V~~~ RENTON , ~UG 1 6 LOO't RC.CE\VED 4-3-095 CENTER VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT to be amended by the following revisions 4-3-095 SUBURBAN AND NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT: A. PURPOSE: These regulations are intended to ensure high quality residential developments within the Center Village Zoning DistrictSuburban and Center Neighborhood Zoning Districts. The intent is to require superior residential projects ~that complement commercial uses, provide first floor commercial activity along arterials, and provide a transition between intensive commercial areas and surrounding single family neighborhoods. B. APPLICABILITY: This section applies to all residential development and mixed commercial/residential development proposed within the following distfict&..Center Village Residential Bonus District. 1. Centers Residential Bonus District A: That aroa dopictod in subsoctions B4a and B4b of this Section 'A'ithin ono hundred fifty foot (150¢) of tho public rights of way of Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 4th St. within the Suburban Center and-N~rhood Center zoning dosignations. 2. Centers Residential-8Qnus District B: That aroa depicted in subsections B4a and B4b of this Section beginning one hundred fifty feot (150¢) from the public rights of way of Sunset Blvd. NE and NE 4th St. within the Suburban Center and Neighborhood Center zoning deSignations. 13. Centers Village Residential Bonus District C: That area depicted in subsections B4c of this Section within the Suburban Center Village zoning designation. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 1 of 11 j g4. Centers Village Residential Bonus District Maps: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 2 of 11 ( i .,., I H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 3 of L 1 a. b. c. L:m Area A ~ Area B ~ Area C H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 4 of 11 This figure is a graphic representation, not guaranteed to survey accuracy. To find the district(s) applicable to a specific parcel, refer to RMC 4-3-09581, 82, and 83. C. USES PERMITTED IN CENTER VILLAGES_-RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT: The following residential uses are permitted in addition to all other nonresidential uses, existing flats/town homes, and accessory uses permitted in the underlying zoning. USES ,6,bbOWEIJ IN USES ALLOWED IN USES-AbbO-WE.[)...tN-[)IS+R!G+-A IJIS+RIG+ S IJIS+RIG+G Getached dwelling Semi attached dwelling, up to 4 GOflsecutively attached +o'Nnheuses. up te 4 Flats when in a mixed use censecutively str-UGttlfO-tflat:-GGffi.hlnss--f-GsiGoAtiai attaGhod Flats or townhouses, when in a with a first floor commercial use(s) mixed use structure that MtJ.It:..f.aFAily hemes combines residential with a first and '.¥hen lecated aeeve the first flear 3eareing and ledging floor commercial use(s) Adl:llt family homos houses Adult family homes Grol:lp homes II, fef Ii) Of-Iess Grol:lp homes II, tm 7 er mOfO Retifemorn residences D. SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL USES AND RESIDENTIALJCOMMERCIAL USES LOCATED WITHIN THE CENTERS VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL BONUS DISTRICT: Unless special development standards are specified below in this subsection, the development standards listed in the underlying CS and CN zoning are applicable. +he modification precodl:lre specified in suesectien E ef this Sectien may eo usod fef residential and residemial/cemmercial mixed use prejects pffiPosing to exceed the delJef~t standards in this subsection. Projects in the CV zone are required to request a variance to deviate from Special Development Standards. underlying zone standards, or the Design Standards in Section 4-3· 095E. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated I from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 5 of 11 . OE~ DliPJEbQPMEN+ DEVELOPMENT S+ANDARt)S.lN S+ANDARDs.-w STANDARDS IN OIS+RIG+A DIS+RIC+ Ii DIS+RIC+ C GENERAL PFeviEle assess anEl iAf~astFblstblFe ta seFve tAe Ele¥ele~ment Site Layout NA eEtl::Ji¥alsnt ta tRess NA rsEtl::Jirsmsnts ssta!:llisl:leEl in tRe sOO€iMsfeR-f~Iat-kms. Attached housing developments of 10 or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum aggregated area of common open On-Site Open space or recreation area of at least 50 Space ~ ~ square feet per unit. Requirement The location, layout and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Reviewing Official. ~ ,2GG sEt. ft. insll;lElin€) !:ll;liIElin€) faat~FiAt. Minimum Land WitRin tRis sEtl::JaFe Area per Wooe faeta€)e 2aG sEl. ft. ml;lst None Dwelling Unit !:le Ele¥ela~eEl in laAdssa~iA€) ar pFivats yaFEI a!:ll;lttiA~ sasl:l I;lnit. LOT DIMENSIONS Minimum Lot Size ~ ~ None LOT COVERAGE Maximum Lot IJss stanElards in tRS Use standards in the Coverage For !:lass ~aAS. ~ base zone. Buildings SETBACKS , Setbacks, IJse standards in tRe ' A 3 f1. miniml;lA1 side Use standards in the General ease ~ane. I set!:lask is FeEll;liFeEl and base zone. na 9FaiestieAs are H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 6 of II \., alieweEl (e.g., eaves, bay winElews) within tf.1e-seteaGk-:- Net sblbjest te Net sblbjeGt te Not subject to FAaXiFAblFA setgask. Net FAaXiFAbiFA setgaGk. ~Jet maximum setback. Special pefffiiUeEl within 2Q ft. ~itteG-within 2Q ft. Not permitted within Setbacks - Detached ef a I3blglis street. ef a I3blgliG street. 20 ft. of a public street. Accessory Garages FAblSt previEle Garages FAblSt l3F9vide Garages must provide a FAiniFAI:lFA 24 ft. ef a FAiniFAbiFA 24 ft. ef a minimum 24 ft. of Garages gask el:lt spase gask el:lt spaGe back out space inGll:ldiAg the alley. iAGlbldiAg tAe alley. including the alley. BUILDING LIMITATIONS 1) Variation or modulation of vertical and horizontal facades is required at a ~) Variatien er minimum of 2 ft. at an FAedbilatien ef IJeFtisal interval of a minimum ~) Variatien er anE! herii;ental faGades of 40 ft. on a building FAeElbilatien ef veFtisal is reqblireE! at a face. anG--Ae~n-ta1-f.aGatles miAiFAI:lFA ef 2 ft. at an is reqblireEl at a iAterval ef a FAiAiFAbiFA 2) Modulation of roof Building FAiAiFAblFA ef 2 ft. at an ef 4G ft. eA a 9blilEliAg lines is required. Design mtewa.f...{}f a FA in iFA blFA faG&.. 3) Building must be Standards ef 4Q ft. eA a gl:lilEliAg oriented to the street 2) Private resideRtial faG&.. eAtry featblres wRish and have the primary 2) MeElbllatien ef mef are ElesigAeEl te I3relJiEle building pedestrian J.in-es4s-r:e~ ffitlMdblal grel:lRg fleer entry(ies) facing the GenReGtieA te the street and clearly e\:JtsiE!e are reqblireg. visible from the street. 4) Project must provide direct pedestrian access to abutting uses. Maximum ~ QQ ft., eXGel3t fer Building ~Je reqblireFAeRt retireFAeAt resi€leRGes. No requirement Length :rhe relatieRshil3 ef the €IwelliRg, parkiRg anE! the-stJ:eet shall Greate the appearaAGe ef a Building siRgle faFAily Location None fl9igAberAooE!, None Standards ReskJeAtial blAits am:l aRY asseGiated GeFAFAersial Eleve~FAent withfn-...a.R overall ElevelooFAent H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendmenls\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updaled from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 7 of 11 .I sRall ge sennosteEl tRrel:lgR ergani2:atien et waEls, blecks, yarEls, central FllaGes, poElostrian linka!ijos and amonity foatl:lr9s. NeAt faoatlos €If stFI:lGtl:lrOs sRall aElElross tAO Fll:Jelic stfeet, FlFivate stroet eF Gel;lFt by FlrelJidin€l: a lanElscaped poElostrian GGARectien, aREl an entry feature faGing the frent yarEl. Garage Nel-\3eFmittoEl to SpOR N~oFmittoEl to epeA Not permitted to open Structure/Entry Elirectly onte a FlrinGiFlal EliroGtly ente a prinGiFlal directly onto a and Exit aFterial stroat. or minor aFtorial stroot. principal arterial street. Maximum Units 4-tJ.r:Hts maXimtlffi per Building ~e rO€fl:liremoRt No requirement HEIGHT 50 ft. In no case may heights exceed 45 feet Maximum maximum height for portions of property Height W--ft-, 354 within 80 feet of an R- 8 or R-10 property line unless a modification through site plan review process is requested. PARKING As re"ll:lirod in RMG 4 As rO"ll:liroEl iR RMG 4 Parking for the 4 080 !NitA tRe follewing 4· 080 witA tAO follewing residential component adElitienal adElitienal of the project must be rO"luiromont&-fetjtHromonts. within a structurod +He rO"ll:lireg Rl:lffieer et Ml:lst 130 IA'itRin an parking garage. Parking parking spaGos for tAe enGleseEl stFblGtl;lre Commercial and guest Location resiElential I:lnits sAall ~detacAod or attasAoEl parking may bo eo prolJiEloEl witAin aR €larage). Garago ml:lst provided as surface onclesod !ijarago. +I=lo eo locatoEl on a parking so long as no rOEjl;liroEl .28 €lblest Elifforont faGago from parking shall be ~cos !'lor rosiElontial tRe-main ontry ef tRe located between a I:lnit may 130 sl:lrfaoo 9l:lilEliAg. +I:lo rOEJl:liroe building and the garkin9. ~e moro iRan .28 91;10St sgaGOS gor orooertv line abuttina H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA lJpdate\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 8 of 11 I. , e stalls ffiay l3e GenseGl:lti'Jely GIl:lsteree witAel:lt an interlJening lanesGapee afea ef a miniffil:lffi ef 8 it. in wiEltA by tAe len€ltA-ef tRe stall. ~l:lRaGe parking net perffiitteEl witfl.iA-t-Re-f.ifst 30 H. of any stre e t-.f.ffiAta9&.- E. MODIFICATION PROCEDURE: attacAeEl resiElential l:lnits may l3e Sl:lRaCe , , paOOng. Ne mere tAan e stalls ffiay l3e Gensecl:ltively cll:lsteree witAel:lt an inteFlJenin§ ICinescapeEl area ef a ffiiniffil:lm et 8 ft. in wietl=l l3y tRe lengtH-ef tAe stall. ~l:lrface parkin€l not alioweEl witRin tRe first 30 n. on any street ffentage. Parking ml:lst l3a locatee te tRe rear ef tRe primar:y strl:lctl:lre er in a eatasRee garage witA rear assess. a public street. Parking garages shall be designed so as not to dominate the facade of the residential building. Parking garage entries shall be designed to minimize the apparent width of garage entries so as not to subordinate the pedestrian entry of the structure. Parking within the building shall be enclosed or screened through any combination of walls, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. Parking garages shall be designed to use similar forms, materials, and details of the residential portion of the building. Te prelJiee €lreater flexibility in meeting tAe pl:lfpeSO ef tAe Conters Resieential Benus District, prejeGts witRin Districts A ane B tAat Ele not moet tRe speGial eOlJelepment staneares ef subseGtien D ef tRis ~ectien ffiay be appreveEl tRrel:lgh a meeification precess when superier eesign is eemenstratee. Except for prejects witRin District C, applicatien may be ffiaEle fer meElificatien ef theso Elovelepffient stanElards pursl:lant to RMC 4 9 250D and the decision criteria stipulated in RMC 4 9 250D2. Fer a modification te be granted, applicants ffiust cern ply with tAe Elesign criteria in RMC 4 Q 280D2 and D3. Additional Design Standards for Center Village: In evaluating compliance with special development standards in the Center Village Residential Bonus District RMC 4-3-095B1! the Planning/Building/Public Works Department shall rely on the recommendations contained within the report on design criteria prepared by the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and StrategiC Planning Administrator or designee as the basis for approval or denial of the request. Projects in the Center Village (VC) zone shall meet all of the following criteria: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 9 of 11 a. Project uses a modified street grid system where most buildings front on a street. Where no public streets exist, a private street grid system within the project is provided. b. Project orients residential developments to the street and has primary building entries facing the street. Entries are identified with a prominent feature or detail. c. Parking garages are designed in a way that does not dominate the facade of the residential building. When garages must be located with vehicular access in the front, due to physical constraints of the property, they are stepped back from the facade of the building. d. Parking lots are oriented to minimize their visual impact on the site and are designed so that the size and landscaping support the residential character of the developments in contrast to adjacent commercial areas. e. Project provides direct pedestrian access from the street fronting the building and from the back where parking is located. f. Walkways through parking areas are well-defined and provide access from public sidewalks into the site. Walkway width is a minimum of five feet (5'). Pavers, changes in color, texture or composition of paving are used. g. Pedestrian connections are provided to the surrounding neighborhood. h. Distinctive building deSign is provided. No single architectural style is required; however,reliance on standardized "corporate" or "franchise" style is discouraged. i. Exterior materials are attractive even when viewed up close. These materials have texture, pattern, or lend themselves to a high level of quality and detailing. j. A consistent visual identity is applied to all sides of buildings thatcan be seen by the general public. k. At least one of the following features is incorporated in structures. containing three (3) or more attached dwellings: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 10 of 11 i. For each dwelling unit, provide at least one architectural projection not less than two feet (2') from the wall plane and not less than four feet (4') wide, or ii. Incorporate building modulation to reduce the overall bulk and mass of buildings, or iii. Vertical and horizontal modulation of roof lines and facades of a minimum of two feet (2') at an interval of a minimum of forty feet (40') on a building face or an equivalent standard which adds interest and quality to the project. (Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002) F. VARIANCE PROCEDURE Center Village Residential Bonus pi2rojects within District C must request a variance to deviate from these code provisions, RMC 4-9-250B. (Ord. 4777, 4- 19-1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 5018, 9-22-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 3 updated from MRSC 4-3-095 leg.doc Page 11 of 11 .' OEV~~~~~~WEtv-t~'NG AUG '2 6 200'·· REC!tft~NDSCAPING A. PURPOSE AND INTENT: , 4-4-070 LANDSCAPING to be amended by adding the following revisions Landscaping requirements are established to provide minimum on-site landscaped standards necessary to maintain and protect property values and enhance the image and appearance of the City. B. APPLICABILITY: These requirements apply to all uses.:. exeept-siRWe-family and tV.'O {21-fam#y residential uses. C. PLANS REQUIRED: Site plans and landscaping plans shall be required with applications for land use actions and building permits.,-as indicated in RMC 4-8-120 Submittal Requirements. The plan shall contain the information required by RMC 4-8-120 and must be approved prior to land use action approval or for issuance of a building permit. D. GENERAL LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: 1. Compliance with Zone Standards Required: See specific zone requirements listed in chapter 4-2 RMC. 2. Parking Lot Landscaping Requirements: Parking lot landscaping requirements shall be as are listed in RMC 4-4-080F7. 3. Existing Plant Material: Existing trees and other vegetation on the site of a proposed development may-should be used where practical if the quality is equal to or better than available nursery stock. Existing desiral:tle-vegetation should be preserved 'Nhere applicable. 4. Protection of Fragile Natural Environments: Areas of fragile natural environments should be protected from development and encroachment as per RMC 4-4-13002. 5. Preservation of Unique Features: If practicable, unique features within the site should be preserved and incorporated into the site development design (such as springs, streams, marshes, significant vegetation, rock out- croppings and significant ravines). 6. Green River Valley Landscaping Requirements: Any development in the Green River Valley shall provide a minimum of two percent (2%) of the total site for landscaping suitable for wildlife habitat. These areas should not be dispersed throughout a site, but should be aggregated in one portion of the property. Where possible, the required two percent (2%) landscaping for adjacent properties should be contiguous. This landscaping is in addition to H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-070A-I.doc 4-4-070 LANDS,CAPING to be amended by adding the following revisions any other landscaping requirements by this Section or any other regul~tion, A drainage swale, planted with vegetation suitable for habitat, may be counted toward the two percent (2%) additional landscape requirement if the Reviewing Official determines that the proposed planting plan and swale design will function to meet the intent of these regulations, including, but not limited to, that the facility slope and fencing design would not inhibit wildlife use, The following map depic,ts the boundaries of this area: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-070A-Ldoc , 4-4-070 LANDSCAPING to be amended by adding the following revisions GRE -"""'--...... ' ........ ~~ H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\ MP;: 4-4-070 LANDSCAPING to be amended by adding the following revisions 7. Compliance with Shorelines Master Program: Any development within the protected shorelines area shall be required to meet the standards and requirements of the City of Renton Shorelines Master Plan. 8. Slopes: Stripping of vegetative slopes where harmful erosion and run-off will occur shall be avoided. T.he faces of cut and fill slopes shall be developed and maintained to control against erosion. This control may consist of effective planting. The protection for the slopes shall be installed within thirty (30) days of grading completion and prior to a request for final project approval. Where slopes are not subject to erosion due to the erosion- resistant character of the materials such protection may be omitted with the permission of the Public Works Department, provided that this protection is not required by the rehabilitation plan. 9. Erosion Control Devices: Where necessary, check dams, cribbing, riprap or other devices or methods shall be employed to control erosion and sediment, provide safety and control the rate of water run-off. 10. Underground Irrigation' System Required: Underground irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained in all landscaped areas. The irrigation system shall provide full water coverage of the planted areas as specified on the plan. E. LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION: All approved landscaping shall b'e completed on site before the issuance of an occupancy permit. F. DEFERRAL OF LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS: Deferral of improvements, due to seasonal planting difficulties, plant shortages, or to the fact that the project is impacted by a pending public works project, may be requested pursuant to RMC 4-9-060, Deferred Improvements. G. AMENDED LANDSCAPING PLAN: The approved landscaping requirements may be modified upon request to the Development Services Division. Such request must be accompanied by the following: 1. Copy of original, approved landscape plan. 2. An amendment plan meeting reguirements of RMC 4-8-120 D12 Landscaping Plan, detailed. 3. Narrative describing propos~d changes and justification for them. The plans may be approved, denied or returned to the applicant with suggestions for changes that would make them acceptable. H. MAINTENANCE: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-070A-J.doc " 4-4-070 LANDSCAPING to be amended by adding the following revisions 1. Maintenance Required: Landscaping required by this Section shall be maintained by the owner and/or occupant and shall be subject to periodic inspection by the Development Services Division. Plantings are to be maintained in a healthy, growing condition and those dead or dying shall be replaced within six (6) months. Property owners shall keep the planting areas reasonably free of weeds and litter. 2. Failure to Maintain Landscaping: The Development Services Division Director is authorized to notify the owner and/or agent that any installed landscaping as required by the Development Services Division is not being adequately maintained and the specific nature of the failure to maintain. The Development Services Division shall send the property owner or agent written notice, specifying what corrections shall be made. I. DAMAGED LANDSCAPING: Upon request of the City, any landscaping required by City regulations thatwRfGl:!. is damaged must be replaced with like or better landscaping as determined by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department Administrator. (Ord. 3718, 3-28-1983; Ord. 4832, 3-6-2000; Ord. 4856, 8-21-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-070A-I.doc : I 4-4-080F 7 Landscape Requirements to be amended by adding the following revisions i. Right Angle and Ninety Degree (90-) Stalls: A minimum width of five feet (5') for right angle and ninety degree (90·) parking stalls along the abutting public right-of-way except for areas of ingress and egress. ii. Angled Parking Layouts, Forming a Sawtooth Pattern: ShaH maintain a minimum of two foot (2') landscaping strip in the narrowest part of the sawtooth pattern abutting a public right-of-way. e. Additional Landscaping Required for Large Parking Lots: In addition to compliance with subsections F7c and F7d of this Section. parking lots ten thousand (10,000) square feet or greater in area shaH have a minimum of five percent (5%) of area within the parking lot landscaped in a pattern that reduces the barren appearance of the parking lot. f. Special Landscape and Screening Standards for Storage Lots: Perimeters of the lot must be effectively screened by a combination of landscaping and fencing: i. A minimum of ten foot (10') landscaped strip is required between the property lines along public rights-of-way and the fence. The landscaping shall be of a size and variety so as to provide an eighty percent (80%) opaque screen. ii. The entire perimeter must be fenced by a sight obscuring fence, a minimum of eight feet (8') in height. Gates may be left unscreened for security purposes. g. Underground Sprinkling Irrigation System Required: Underground sprinkliAg-irrigation systems shaH be required to be installed and maintained for all landscaped areas. The sprinkler irrigation system shall provide full water coverage of the planted areas as specified on the plan. h. Installation to Comply with Approved Plans: All landscaping and sprinkler irrigation systems shall be installed in accordance with the landscaping and sprinklerirrigation plan~ submitted by the applicant and approved by the BH+J.GjngPlanning/Building/Public Works Department (see RMC 4-8-120D9(li), Irrigation Plans, and 4-8-120D9t!:.. Landscaping Plans). H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-080F.doc 4-4-080F 7 Landscape Requirements to be amended by adding the following revisions 4-4-080F 7 Landscape Requirements 7. Landscape Requirements: a. When Applicable: All parking lots, loading areas and drive-in businesses, vehicle sales lots~ and storage lots except those used for detached single family chl/elling units, duplexes and those in enclosed Buildings, shall be landscaped to the standard§. set forth in RMC 4-4-070. b. Landscape Approval Required: All landscaping under this Section is subject to approval by the BHHding/Zoning Planning/Building/Public Works Department. . c. General Requirements for All Parking Lots: i. Landscape Safety Standards: Landscaping shall not conflict with the safety of those using adjacent sidewalks or with traffic safety. ii. Retention of Existing Landscaping Encouraged: Where possible~ existing mature trees and shrubs shall be preserved and incorporated in the landscape layout. iii. Screening of Adjacent and/or Abutting Residential Uses Required: A planting area or berm with landscaping shall be provided on those sides of a parking lot that are adjacent to or abutting properties used and/or zoned for residential purposes. (See specific zoning classification.) Such planting shall be subject to the requirements of the zoning development standards and shall be of a sufficient height to serve as a buffer. (Amd. Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003) iv. Screening Modifications: The Development Services Division may allow a minimum of a forty two inch (42") screening fence in lieu of landscaping upon proper application for good cause shown, which shall include but not be limited to a narrow parking lot. v. Minimum Width: Any landscaping area shall be a minimum of five feet (5') in width. d. Minimum Landscaping Width Requirements Abutting Public Right-of-Way: Parkil1g lots shall have landscaped areas as follows: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-4-080F.doc 4-4-120 STORAGE LOTS -OUTSIDE: A. SCREENING REQUIRED: 4-4-120 STORAGE LOTS -OUTSIDE to be amended by the following revisions Outside storage lots shall be effectively screened by a combination of landscaping and fencing .. along the perimeter. 1. Landscaping: A minimum of ten feet (10') landscaped strip is required between the property lines along public rights-of-way and the fence. The landscaping shall be of size and variety so as to provide an eighty percent (80%) opaque screen. 2. Fencing: The entire perimeter must be fenced by a minimum of an eight foot (8') high sight obscuring fence. Gates may be left unscreened for security purposes. B. SURFACING: Storage areas may be surfaced with crushed rock or similar material subject to the approval of the Development Services Division to minimize dust, control surface drainage and provide suitable access. (Ord. 3653, 8-23-1982) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-120 leg.doc ",' 4-4-130 TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING REGULATIONS to be amended by the following revisions 4-4-130 TREE CUTTING AND LAND CLEARING REGULATIONS: A. PURPOSE: This Section provides regulations for the clearing of land and the protection and preservation of trees and associated significant vegetation for the following purposes: 1. To preserve and enhance the City's physical and aesthetic character by minimizing indiscriminate removal or destruction of trees and ground cover; 2. To implement and further the goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan for the environment, open space, wildlife habitat, vegetation, resources, surface drainage, watersheds, and economics, and promote building and site planning practices that are consistent with the City's natural topographical and vegetational features while at the same time recognizing that certain factors such as condition (e.g., disease, danger of falling, etc.), proximity to existing and proposed structures and improvements, interference with utility services, protection of scenic views, and the realization of a reasonable enjoyment of property may require the removal of certain trees and ground cover; 3. To ensure prompt development, restoration and replanting, and effective erosion control of property during and after land clearing; 4. To promote land development practices that result in a-minimal adverse disturbance to existing vegetation and soils within the City; 5. To minimize surface water and groundwater runoff and diversion, and aid in the stabilization of soil, and to minimize erosion and sedimentation, and minimize the need for additional storm drainage facilities caused by the destabilization of soils; 6. To retain clusters of trees for the abatement of noise and for wind protection; 7. To recognize that trees and ground cover reduce air pollution by producing pure oxygen from carbon dioxide; 8. To preserve and enhance wildlife and wildlife habitat including streams, riparian corridors, wetlands, and ~stands of trees. B. APPLICABILITY: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc --- --- The regulations of this Section apply to any developed, partially developed .. or undeveloped property where land development or routine vegetation management activities are undertaken. c. EXEMPTIONS: The following activities are exempt from f.8.outine vYegetation mManagement permit requirements, and may be authorized without an associated land development permit; however, the activities must be conducted in accordance with stated requirements: 1. Emergency Situations: Removal of trees and/or ground cover by the City and/or public or private utility in emergency situations involving immediate danger to life or property, substantial fire hazards, or interruption of services provided by a utility. 2. Dead, Dangerous, or Diseased Trees: Removal of dead, terminally diseased, damaged, or dangerous ground covor or trees thatwhiGA have been certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist, selection of which to be approved by the City based on the type ot information required, or the City prior to their removal. 3. Maintenance Activities/Essential Tree Removal -Public or Private Utilities, Roads and Public Parks: Maintenance activities including routine vegetation management and essential tree removal tor public and private utilities, road rights-ot-way and easements, aA€l-public parks. and Renton Municipal Airport Runway Protection Zone (see map RMC 4-3-020F).~ 4. Installation of SEPA Exempt Public or Private Utilities: Installation of distribution lines by public and private utilities provided that such activities are categorically exempt from the provisions of the State Environmental Policy Act and RMC 4-9-070, Environmental Review Procedures. 5. Existing and Ongoing Agricultural Activities: Clearing associated with existing and ongoing agricultural activities as defined in chapter 4-11 RMC, Definitions. 6. Commercial Nurseries or Tree Farms: Clearing or cutting ot only those trees ~that are planted and growing on the premises of a licensed retailer or wholesaler. 7. Public Road Expansion: Expansion of public roads. 8. Site Investigative Work: Site investigative work necessary for land use application submittals such as surveys, soil logs, percolation tests, and other related activities including the use of mechanical equipment to perform site H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc ,;', investigative work provided the work is conducted in accordance with the following requirements. a. Investigative work should not disturb any more than five percent (5%) of any protected sensitive area described in subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas, on the subject property. In every case impacts shall be minimized and disturbed areas restored. b. In every location where site investigative work is conducted, disturbed areas shall be minimized, and immediately restored. c. A notice shall be posted on the site by the property owner or owner's agent indicating that site investigative work is being conducted, and that the work must minimize disturbance to the critical areas identified in subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas. d. No site investigative work shall commence without first notifying the Director or designee in advance. 9. Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities: Tree cutting and associated use of mechanical equipment is permitted as follows, except as provided in subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas: a. On a developed lot or on a partially developed lot less than one-half (1/2) of an acre any number of trees may be removed; b. On a partially developed lot greatef-thaA-one-half (1/2) of an acre and greater or on an undeveloped lot provided that: i. No more than three (3) trees are removed in any twelve (12) month period from a property under thirty five thousand (35,000) square feet in size; and ii. No more than six (6) trees are removed in any twelve (12) month period from a property G¥ef-thirty five thousand (35,000) square feet and greater in size. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updute\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc LOT TYPES iii. Rights-ot-Way Unobstructed: In conducting minor tree cutting activities, rights-of-way shall not be obstructed. 10. Landscaping or Gardening Permitted: Land clearing in conformance with the provisions of subsection C9 of this Section, Allowable Tree Cutting Activities, and subsection 02, Restrictions for Critical Areas, is permitted on a developed lot for purposes of landscaping or gardening. Land clearing in conformance with the provisions of subsection C9, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, and subsection 02, Restrictions for Critical Areas, is permitted on a partially developed or undeveloped lot for purposes of landscaping or gardening provided that no mechanical equipment is used. 11. Operational Mining/Quarrying: Land clearing and tree cutting associated with previously approved, operational mining and quarrying activities. 12. Modification ot Existing Utilities and Streets (not otherwise exempted by RMC 4-3-050C7) by Ten Percent (10%) or Less: Overbuilding (enlargement beyond existing project needs) or replacement and/or rehabilitation of existing streets, provided the work does not increase the footprint of the structure, line or street by more than ten percent (10%) within the critical area and/or buffer areas. (Ord. 4851, 8-27-2000) D. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES: 1. Prohibited Activities: There shall be no tree cutting or land clearing on any site for the sake of preparing that site for future development unless a land development permit for the site has been approved by the City. 2. Restrictions for Critical Areas -General: No tree cutting, or land clearing, or groundcover management is permitted: a. On portions of property with identified and protected critical habitats; b. On protected slopes except as allowed in this Section or in the Critical Areas Regulation, RMC 4-3~050; or H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -lmplement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-l30 leg.doc c. Areas classified as very high landslide hazards, except as allowed in this Section or in the Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-3-050. Buffer requirements shall be consistent with the critical area regulations. Tree cutting or land clearing shall be consistent with established A!:::!.ative gGrowth J'}.Erotection aArea requirements of RMC 4-3-050G. 3. Restrictions for Critical Areas -Routine Vegetation Management Permits: In addition to the prohibitions of subsection 02 of this Section, no tree cutting, land clearing or groundcover management, except for enhancement purposes or otherwise permitted by this Section, shall be allowed per a routine vegetation management permit in the following cases: a. In wetlands and their buffers; and b. Riparian corridors including a minimum buffer area of twenty five feet (25') from the ordinary high water mark of the creek or stream and in the two hundred foot (200') §State shoreline area. 4. Restrictions for Critical Areas -Land Development Permits and Building Permits: In addition to the prohibitions of SUbsection 02 of this Section, no tree cutting, land clearing or groundcover management, except for enhancement purposes or otherwise permitted by this Section, shall be allowed per a land development or building permit in the following cases: a. In a wetland; and b. Within a minimum of twenty five feet (25') of the ordinary high water mark of creeks, streams, lakes and other shoreline areas or within fifteen feet (15') of the top of the bank of same, nor should any mechanical equipment operate in such areas except for the development of public parks and trail systems and enhancement activities. E. AUTHORITY AND INTERPRETATION: The City's Development Services Division Director, or theJ:Hs duly authorized representative, is hereby authorized and directed to interpret and enforce all the provisions of this Section. F. PERMITS REQUIRED: 1. Land Development Permit: An approved land development permit is required in order to conduct tree cutting or land clearing on any site for the sake of preparing that site for future development. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendmenls\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-l30 leg.doc 2. Permit Required for Routine Vegetation Management on Undeveloped Properties: Any person who performs routine vegetation management on undeveloped property in the City must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. 3. Permit Required to Use'Mechanical Equipment: Except where use of mechanical equipment is specifically listed as exempt, any person who uses mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree cutting, landscaping, or gardening on developed, partially developed or undeveloped property must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. 4. Timber Stand Maintenance -Conditional Use Permit Required: While timber harvesting shall not be permitted until such time as a valid land development is approved, a request may be made for maintenance and thinning of existing timber s,tands to promote the overall health and growth of the stand. Permits allowing maintenance and thinning beyond the limits allowed in subsections sUbpection C9 of this Section, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, shall be considered as a conditional use permit, by the Hearing Examiner according to the following criteria in lieu of standard conditional use permit criteria: a. Appropriate approvals have been sought and obtained with the State Department of Natural Resources; and, b. The activity shall improve the health and growth of the stand and maintain long-term alternatives for preservation of trees; and c. The activity shall meet the provisions of subsections H2, Applicability, Performance Standards, and Alternates, and H3, General Review Criteria, of this Section; and d. Thinning activities shall be limited to less than forty percent (40%) of the volume and trees. ' 5. Tree Cutting -Solar Access or Pasture Land: A routine vegetation management permit is required for tree cutting in greater amounts than specified under partially exempt actions in subsection CQ~ of this Section, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, for any property where tree cutting is proposed without an associated land development permit. A routine vegetation management permit may be issued allowing tree cutting only in the following cases: a. For purposes of allowing solar access to existing structures; or H:\EDNSP\COl11P Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc b. To create pasture land where agricultural activities are permitted uses in the zone. Any tree cutting activities shall be the minimum necessary to accomplish the purpose, and shall be consistent with subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas. G. ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS: Permits for routine vegetation management shall be processed consistent with RMC 4-9-195, Routine Vegetation Management Permits. (Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002) H. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT/BUILDING PERMITS: 1. Plan Required: When a development permit is submitted to the City it shall be accompanied by an inventory of existing trees, a tree retention plan, and a land clearing and tree cutting plan. Where it is not practicable to retain all trees on site due to the a-proposed development, the ~plan shall identify tRGse-trees thatw-rusR are proposed for removal. Where the drip line of a tree overlaps an area where construction activities will occur, this shall be indicated on the j:}IGt-plan. Trees shall be shown on the plan as follows: a. For allowed activities, including allowed exemptions, modifications, and variances, show all trees proposed to be cut!!LOO :priority tree retention areas:: slopes twenty five percent (25%) to thirty nine perceont (39%)or greator, high or very high landslide hazard areas, and high erosion hazard areas. b. Show trees to be cut in :protected critical areas:: wetlands, streams, floodways, floodplains, slopes forty percent (40%) or greater, high or very high landslide hazard areas, and critical habitat if the activity is exempt or allowed by the critical areas regulations in RMC 4-3-050C5, Specific Exemptions. . c. Show all trees to be retained in critical area buffers. d. Show trees to be cut along shorelines, streams, and lakes and in their buffers. e. Show trees proposed to be cut within required zoning setbacks along perimeter of development. f. In all other areas of the site, trees to be cut maYGaA be indicated generally with clearing limits lines. (Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002) H:'EDNSP\Comp Plan'Amendmenls\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA 'Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc --------.~---------------------------~---- 2. Applicability, Performance Standards and Alternates: All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall conform to the criteria and performance standards set forth in this Section unless otherwise recommended in an approved soil engineering, engineering geology, hydrology Gf-forest management plan or arborist report and where the alternate procedures will be equal to or superior in achieving the policies of this Section. All land clearing and tree cutting activities may be conditioned to ensure that the standards, criteria, and purpose of this Section are met. 3. General Review Criteria: All land clearing and tree cutting activities shall meet the following criteria: a. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or significantly contribute to landslides, accelerated soil creep, settlement and subsidence or hazards associated with strong ground motion and soil liquefaction. b. The land clearing and tree cutting will not create or significantly contribute to flooding, erosion, Gf increased turbidity,siltation or other form~ of pollution in a watercourse. c. lLh!and clearing and tree cutting are necessary. such activities will be conducted to maintain or provide visual screening and buffering between land uses of differing intensity, are maintained consistent with applicable I : landscaping and se~back prOVisions of the Renton Municipal Code. d. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be conducted so as to expose the smallest practical area of soil to erosion for the least possible time, consistent with an approved build-out schedule and including any necessary erosion control measures. e. Once approved land clearing and tree cutting operations commence, the applicant shall have 30 days to remove all debris and cut vetetation from the site. Extension of this date must be approved by the Director of the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. af. Land clearing and tree cutting shall be consistent with subsection D2 of this Section, Restrictions for Critical Areas, and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. 4. Tree Preservation: Trees on the property shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible-Gfl-tl:le property whore they are growing. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc a. Ability to Condition Plan: The City may require a modification of the land clearing and tree cutting plan or the associated land development plan to ensure the retention of the maximum number of trees. b. Clearing -Conditions of Approval: The Department Administrator or designee may condition a proposal to restrict clearing outside of building sites, rights-of-way, utility lines and easements, to require sequencing and phasing of construction, or other measures, consistent with the permitted density and intensity of the zone. 5. Native Growth Protection Areas: Native 92.rowth f},Erotection a6reas may be established through the subdivision process, or via another land development permit pursuant to the critical areas regulations and RMC 4-3- 050G, and in environmentally critical areas including but not limited to the following area: a buffer area from the annual high water mark of creeks, streams, lakes and other shoreline areas or from the top of the bank of same, whichever provides good resource protection, as determined by a certified wetland biologist or similar.7 6. Timing: The City may restrict the timing of the land clearing and tree cutting activities to specific dates and/or seasons when such restrictions are necessary for the public health, safety and welfare, or for the protection of the environment. 7. Restrictions for Critical Areas: See subsection D2 of this Section, Prohibited Activities and RMC 4-3-050, Critical Areas Regulations. 8. Tree/Ground Cover Retention: The following measures may be used by the Department Administrator or designee in conditioning a land development permit or building permit proposal per subsection H4 of this Section, Tree Preservation, to comply with the general review criteria of subsection H3. a. Trees on the property shall be maintained to the maximum extent feasible on the property where they are growing. b. The City may require and/or allow the applicant to relocate or replace trees, provide interim erosion control, hydroseed exposed soils, or other similar conditions which would implement the intent of this Section. c. Priority shall be given to retention of trees on sensitive slopes and on lands classified as having high or very high landslide hazards, or high erosion hazards as classified in the critical areas regulations. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updute\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc d. Where feasible, trees thatwA-iGR shelter interior trees or trees on adjacent properties from strong winds that could otherwise cause them to blow down should be retained. e. Except in critical areas unless enhancement activities are being performed, the removal of trees on the following list should be allowed in order to avoid invasive root systems, weak wood prone to breakage, or varieties which tend to harbor insect pests: i. All Populus speCies including cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), quaking aspen (Populus tremuloides), lombardy poplar (Populus nigra "Italiqa"), etc. ii. All Alnus species wJ:HGR-includolngs red alder (Alnus oregona), black alder (Alnus glutinosa), white alder (Alnus rhombifolia), etc. iii. Salix species wJ:HGR-includlngos weeping willow (Salix babylonica), etc., unless along a stream bank and away from paved areas. iv. All Platanus species wIliGl:l-includlngo London plane tree (Platanus acerifolia), American sycamore;l-buttonwood (Platanus occidentalis), etc. 9. Protection Measures During Construction: a. Tree Protection Measures: Protection measures in subsections H9b(i) through H9b(vi) of this section shall apply for all trees thatwf::HGR are to be retained in areas immediately subject to construction. These requirements may be waived pursuant to RMC 4-9-250D, Modification Procedures, individually or severally by the City if the developer demonstrates them to be inapplicable to the specific on-site conditions or if the intent of the regulations will be implemented by another means with the same result. b. Drip Line: All of the following tree protection measures.shall apply: i. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. ii. The applicant shall erect and maintain rope barriers, temporary construction fencing, or place bales of hay on the drip line to protect roots. In addition. the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc . I iii. If the grade level adjoining tG--a tree to be retained is to be raised, the applicant shall construct a dry rock wall or rock well around the tree. The diameter of this wall or well must be equal to the tree's drip line. iv. The applicant may not install impervious surface material within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. v. The grade level around any tree to be retained may not be lowered within the greater of the following areas: (1) the area defined by the drip line of the tree, or (2) an area around the tree equal to one foot in diameter for each one inch of tree caliper. vi. The applicant shall retain a qualified professional to prune branches and roots, fertilize, and water as appropriate for any trees and ground cover thatwA-iGR are to be retained. I. VARIANCE PROCEDURES: The Hearing Examiner shall have the authority to grant variances from the provisions of this Section pursuant to RMC 4-1-050F1 q and RMC 4-9-250: J. VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES: 1. Penalties: Penalties for any violation of any of the provisions of this Section shall be in accord with RMC 1-3-2. In a prosecution under this Section, each tree removed, damaged or destroyed will constitute a separate violation, and the monetary penalty for each violated tree shall be no less than the minimum penalty, and no greater than the maximum penalty of RMC 1-3-2D. 2. Additional Liability for Damage: In addition, any person who violates any provision of this Section or of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. 3. Restoration Required: The City may require replacement of all improperly removed ground cover with species similar to those thatwA-iGR were removed or other approved species such that the biological and habitat values will be replaced. Restoration shall include installation and maintenance of interim and emergency erosion control measures thatwA-iGR shall be required as determined by the City. 4. Replacement Required: The City may require for each tree thatwA-iGR was improperly cut and/or removed, replacement planting of a tree of equal size, quality and species or up to three (3) trees of the same species in the H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc immediate vicinity of the tree(s) thatwR-iGR was removed. The replacement trees will be of sufficient caliper to adequately replace the lost treo(s) or a minimum of three inches (3") in caliper. 5. Stop Work: For any parcel on which trees and/or ground cover are improperly removed and subject to penalties under this Section, the City shall stop work on any existing permits and halt the issuance of any or all future permits or approvals until the property is fully restored in compliance with this Section and all penalties are paid. (Ord. 4219, 6-5-1989; Amd. Ord. 4835, 3- 27-2000) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zol11ng -Implement GMA\Chapter 4 updated from MRSC 4-4-130 leg.doc 4-6-060 J. PRIVATE STREETS: to be amended by adding the following revisions 1. When Permitted: Private streets are allowed for access to six (6) or less lots, with no more than four (4) of the lots not abutting a public right-of-way. Private streets will only be permitted if a public street the proposed private street-is not antiCipated by the Department to be necessary for existing or future traffic and/or pedestrian circulation through the subdivision or to serve adjacent property. 2. Minimum Standards: Such private streets shall consist of a minimum of a twenty six-foot (26') easement with a twenty-foot (20') pavement width. The private street shall provide a turnaround meeting the minimum requirements of this Chapter. No sidewalks are required for private streets, however, drainage improvements per City Code are required, as well as an approved pavement thickness (minimum of four inches (4") asphalt over six inches (6") crushed rock). The maximum grade for the private street shall not exceed fifteen percent (15%), except for within approved hillside subdivisions. The land area included in private street easements shall not be included in the required minimum lot area for purposes of subdivision. 3. Signage Required: Appurtenant traffic control devices including installation of traffic and street name signs, as required by the Department, shall be provided by the subdivider. The street name signs will include a sign labeled "Private Street". 4. Easement Required: An easement will be required to create the private street. 5. Timing of Improvements: The private street must be installed prior to recording of the plat unless deferred. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\4-6-060J leg.doc Page 1 of 1 . NT pLANN\NG OEVE~9~~~ RENTON AUG "2 6 2OO~ . . _ elVED4-7-150 STREETS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS fU:,C to be amended by the following revisions 4-7-150 STREETS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: A. RELATIONSHIP TO ADJOINING STREET SYSTEM: The proposed street system shall extend and create connections between existing streets unless otherwise approved by the Department. Prior to approving a street system that does not extend or connect, the Reviewing Official shall find that such exception shall meet the requirements of MRC 4-7 -150E3. The roadway classifications shall be as defined and designated by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. B. STREET NAMES: All proposed street names shall be approved by the City. C. ARTERIALS, INTERSECTIONS: Streets intersecting with existing or proposed public highways, major or secondary arterials shall be held to a minimum. D. STREET ALIGNMENT: The alignment of all streets shall be reviewed and approved by the Department. The street standards set by RMC 4-6-060 shall apply unless otherwise approved. Street alignment offsets of less than one hundred twenty five feet (125') are not desirable, but may be approved by the Department upon a showing of need but only after provision of all necessary safety measures. E. STREET PATTERN: 1. Flexible Grid: A grid-like street pattern (or flexible grid) shall be used to connect existing and new development and shall be the predominant street pattern in any subdivision permitted by this Section. 2. Linkages: Linkages, including streets, sidewalks, pedestrian or bike paths, shall be provided «H-I=I9 satisfaction of t~iGia+within and between neighborhoods when they can create a continuous and interconnected network of roads and pathways. Implementation of this requirement shall comply with Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Objective T-A and Policies T-9 through T-16 and Community Design Policy # 3. Exceptions: a. The flexible grid pattern may be adjusted by reducing the number of linkages between roads, in consideration of two (2) of the following factors: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-150 leg. doc Page 1~3 '. \ .1J. Topographical/environmental constraints, ...... ii. EnvironmeAtal const.ffiin.ts, iii. Achievement of min~ . iv. Increase in art~Rreugh traffic, v. Safety, , gvi. Creation of dual street frontage, aM ~ The location of s,ubstantial existing improvements-:-, and 4. Prior to adoption of a complete grid street plan, reasonable connections that link existing portions of the grid system shall be made. At a minimum, stub streets shall be required within subdivisions to allow future connectivity. 5. Alley access is the preferred street pattern. Prior to approval of a plat without alley access, the Reviewing Official shall evaluate an alley layout and determine that the use of alley(s) is not feasible. b. Offset or loop roads are the preferred alternative configurations. I c. Cul-de-sac streets may ~be permitted by the Reviewing Official where the street is-Ret required as a connection to the greater neighborhood street system. due to demonstrable physical constraints no future connection to a larger street pattern is physically possible. F. IMPROVEMENTS REQUIRED: All adjacent rights-of-way and new rights-of-way dedicated as part of the plat, including streets, roads, and alleys, shall be graded to their full width and the pavement and sidewalks shall be constructed as specified in the street standards or deferred by the Board of Public Works. (Ord. 4636,9-23-1996) G. ADJACENT TO UNPLATTED ACREAGE: Streets which may be extended in the event of future adjacent platting shallmay be required to be dedicated to the plat boundary line. Extensions of greater depth H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-150 leg.doc Page 2...Q[3 than an average lot shall be improved with temporary turnarounds. Dedication of a full-width boundary street shallmay be required in certain instances to facilitate future development. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-150 leg.doc Page 3~3 Section 4-2-110D 08/25/2004 2:43 PM 4-2-110D to be amended by adding the following revisions b. When abutting a common property line, 1 additional foot of height for each additional 2' of perimeter building setback beyond the minimum required along a common property line. 10. In order to serve as a transition between the lower density R-4 zone and the higher density R-8 zone "small assemblage lots" of up to a maximum of 50 lots per assemblage shall be allowed within 600 feet of an R-8 zone when at least 30% of the site is permanently set aside as "contiguous open space." Such open space shall be situated to act as a visual buffer between smal1 assemblage lots and those allowed elsewhere in the zone. In the R-4 zone, small assemblage lots may be no smaller than those allowed under the R-8 zone development standards. DE'!;::! nPMENT PLANNING . :. ~ f ()F RENTON . AUG 2 6 200't. 4-7-160 RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS to be amended by adding th following revisions I:'CEIVED He 4-7-160 RESIDENTIAL BLOCKS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: A. WIDTH: Blocks shall be wiGe-deep enough to allow two (2) tiers of lots, except where~ _1._-,Efronting on principal arterials defined in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. major streets or prevented by topographical conditions or size of the property. L-The location and extent of environmental constraints prevent a standard plat land configuration. including size and shape of the parcel. 3. Prior to approval of single lot configuration based on exceptions1 and 2, the proponent must demonstrate that a different layout or provision of an alley system is not feasible. B. WALKWAYS: Where circumstances warrant, the Heafiflg-€-xaffiinefReviewing Official may require one or more public crosswalks or walkways of not less than six feet (6') in width dedicated to the City to extend entirely across the width of the block at locations deemed necessary. Such crosswalks or walkways shall be paved for their entire width and length with a permanent surface and shall be adequately lighted at the developer's cost. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-160 leg.doc ',<' ENT PLANNING DEVEL~~F RENTON .. CI AUG '2 6 'too'· RECE\VEIl7-170 RESIDENTIAL LOTS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM , STANDARDS to be amended by the following revisions 4-7-170 RESIDENTIAL LOTS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: A. ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. B. ACCESS REQUIREMENTS: Each lot must have access to a public street or road. Access may be by private access easement street per the requirements of the street standards. C. MINIMUM SIZE: The size, shape, and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. Land area included in private access easements shall not be included in lot area calculations. D. MINIMUM WIDTH: Width between side lot lines at their foremost points (Le., the points where the side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) shall not be less than eighty percent (80%) of the required lot width except in the cases of (1) pipestem lots, which shall have a minimum width of twenty feet (20') and (2) lots of the turning circle of cul-de-sac shall be a minimum of thirty five feet (35') for non- pipestem lots. (Ord. 4522, 6-5-1995) E. PROPERTY CORNERS AT INTERSECTIONS: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of fifteen feet (15'). F. PIPESTEM LOTS ALLOWED: Pipestem lots may be permitted for new plats to achieve densities permitted within the Zoning Code when there is no other feasible alternative to achieving the permitted density. 1. Minimum Lot Size and Pipestem Width and Length: The pipestem shall not exceed one hundred fifty feet (150') in length and not be less than twenty feet (20') in width. The portion of the lot narrower than eighty percent (80%) of the minimum permitted width shall not be used for lot area calculations nor for measurement of required front yard setbacks. Land area included in private access easements shall not be included in lot area calculations. (Amd. Ord. 4751, 11-16-1998; Ord. 4999, 1-13-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7 -170 leg. doc Page 1 of 12 2. Shared Access Requirements: Abutting pipestem lots shall have a shared private access driveway. A restrictive covenant will be required on both parcels for maintenance of the pipestem driveway. (Amd. Ord. 4999, 1- 13-2003) 4-7-180 INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL BLOCKS AND LOTS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: The division of land for industrial and commercial purposes shall conform to the requirements and minimum standards of residential design except as provided in this Section. A. PROPERTY CORNERS AT INTERSECTIONS: All lot corners at intersections of dedicated public rights-of-way, except alleys, shall have minimum radius of twenty five feet (25/)~ B. LOT ORIENTATION: The size, shape and orientation of lots shall meet the minimum area and width requirements of the applicable zoning classification and shall be appropriate for the type of development and use contemplated. C. LOT ARRANGEMENT: Insofar as practical, side lot lines shall be at right angles to street lines or radial to curved street lines. . 4-7-190 PUBLIC USE AND SERVI.CE AREA -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: , Due consideration shall be given by the subdivider to the allocation of adequately sized areas for public service usage. A. EASEMENTS FOR UTILITIES: Easements may be required for the. maintenance anp operation of utilities as specified by the Department. B. COMMUNITY ASSETS: Due regard shall be shown to all natural features such as large trees, watercourses, and similar community assets which, if preserved, will add attractiveness and value to the prop~rty. 4-7-200 INSTALLATION OF UTILITIES -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: A. SANITARY SEWERS: Unless septic tanks are specifically Cl.pproved by the Department and the King County Health Department, sanitary ,sewers shall be provided by the developer at no cost to the City and designed in accordance with City standards. Side sewer lines shall be installed eight feet (8') into each lot if sanitary sewer mains are available, or provided with the subdivision development. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7 -170 leg.doc Page 2 of 12 \ B. STORM DRAINAGE: An adequate drainage system shall be provided for the proper drainage of all surface water. Cross drains shall be provided to accommodate all natural water flow and shall be of sufficient length to permit full-width roadway and required slopes. The drainage system shall be designed per the requirements of RMC 4- 6-030, Drainage (Surface Water) Standards. The drainage system shall include detention capacity for the new street areas. Residential plats shall also include detention capacity for future development of the lots. Water quality features shall also be deSigned to provide capacity for the new street paving for the plat. C. WATER SYSTEM: The water distribution system including the locations of fire hydrants shall be designed and installed in accordance with City standards as defined by the Department and Fire Department requirements. D. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES: All utilities designed to serve the subdivision shall be placed underground. Any utilities installed in the parking strip shall be placed in such a manner and depth to permit the planting of trees. Those utilities to be located beneath paved surfaces shall be installed, including all service connections, as approved by the Department. Such installation shall be completed and approved prior to the application of any surface material. Easements may be required for the maintenance and operation of utilities as specified by the Department. E. CABLE TV CONDUITS: Any cable TV conduits shall be undergrounded at the same time as other basic utilities are installed to serve each lot. Conduit for service connections shall be laid to each lot line by subdivider as to obviate the necessity for disturbing the street area, including sidewalks, or alley improvements when such service connections are extended to serve any building. The cost of trenching, conduit, pedestals and/or vaults and laterals as well as easements therefore required to bring service to the development shall be borne by the developer and/or land owner. The subdivider shall be responsible only for conduit to serve his development. Conduit ends shall be elbowed to final ground elevation and capped. The cable TV company shall provide maps and specifications to the subdivider and shall inspect the conduit and certify to the City that it is properly installed. F. LATECOMER'S AGREEMENTS: Where a development is required to construct utility improvements that may also be required by other developments or by future development of other parcels in the vicinity, then the developer may request establishment of a latecomer's agreement to reimburse the developer for all initial costs of the improvements. The procedure to follow in making application for the latecomer's agreement and the steps to be followed by the City are as detailed in chapter 9-5 RMC. 4-7-210 OTHER IMPROVEMENTS -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND MINIMUM STANDARDS: A. MONUMENTS: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg. doc Page 3 of 12 ...........------- Concrete permanent control monuments shall be established at each and every controlling corner of the subdivision. Interior monuments shall be located as determined by the Department. All surveys shall be per the City of Renton surveying standards. B. SURVEY: All other lot corners shall be marked per the City surveying standards. C. STREET SIGNS: The subdivider shall install all street name signs necessary in the subdivision. , 4-7-220 HILLSIDE SUBDIVISIONS: A. PURPOSE: Because of their steeper slopes, the sites of hillside subdivisions ordinarily should have greater attention paid to the potential for drainage, erosion, and slope stability problems than other subdivisions. B. PROCEDURE: Any short plat or subdivision meeting the definition of a "hillside subdivision" shall follow the procedures established for subdivisions. Hillside subdivisions, including short plats, shall require the review and approval of the Hearing Examiner. C. STANDARDS: The following additional standards shall apply to hillside subdivisions: 1. Application Information: Information concerning the soils, geology, drainage patterns, and vegetation shall be presented in order to evaluate the drainage, erosion control and slope stability for site development of the proposed plat. The applicant must demonstrate that the development of the hillside subdivision will not result in soil erosion and sedimentation, landslide, slippage, excess surface water runoff, increased costs of building and maintaining roads and public facilities and increased need for emergency relief and rescue operations. 2. Grading: Detailed plans for any proposed cut and fill operations shall be submitted. These plans shall include the angle of slope, contours, compaction, and retaining walls. 3. Streets: a. Streets may only have a grade exceeding fifteen percent (15%) if approved by the Department and the Fire Department. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg. doc Page 4 of 12 , .---- , b. Street widths may be less than those required in the street standards for streets with grades steeper than fifteen percent (15%) if parking prohibition on one or both sides of the street is approved by the Administrator. 4. Lots: Lots may be required to be larger than minimum lot sizes required by the Zoning Code. Generally, lots in steeper areas of the subdivision should be larger than those in less steep areas of the subdivision. 5. Erosion Control Requirements: Any clearing or grading shall be accompanied by erosion control measures as deemed necessary by the Department. 4-7-230 BINDING SITE PLANS: A. PURPOSE AND INTENT: The purpose of this Section is to provide an optional method for the division of land classified for industrial, commercial, or mixed use [CN, CS, CD, CO, COR, CA, CC, IL, 1M, and IH zones] through a binding site plan as authorized in chapter 58.17 RCW. This method may be employed as an alternative to the subdivision and short subdivision procedures in this Chapter. This Section specifies administrative requirements for the review and approval of binding site plans that are in addition to the procedural requirements of chapter 4-8 RMC and other applicable provisions of the City development regulations. B. PRINCIPLES OF ACCEPTABILITY: Approval of a binding site plan shall take place only after the following are met: 1. The site that is subject to the binding site plan shall consist of one or more contiguous lots legally created. 2. Adequate provisions, either on the face of the binding site plan or in a supporting document, have been made for drainageways, alleys, streets, other public ways, water supplies, open space and sanitary wastes, for the entire property covered by the binding site plan. 3. Comply with all building code requirements. 4. Comply with all zoning code requirements and development standards. 5. Have suitable physical characteristics. A proposed binding site plan may be denied because of flood, inundation, or swamp conditions or construction of protective improvements may be required as condition of approval. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg.doc Page 5 of 12 ------------------------------------------~--.... " .. C. APPLICABILITY: A binding site plan may be approved as a separate mechanism for the division of land. A binding site plan may also be approved concurrently with a site plan. A binding site plan may also be merged with a site plan, a development agreement, or both a site plan and development agreement per the criteria listed in this Section. The site that is subject to the binding site plan may be reviewed independently for developed sites, concurrently with or subsequent to a site development permit application for undeveloped land or concurrently with or subsequent to a building permit application. All applications for binding site plans shall be subject to the provisions of this Section, including binding site plans to be incorporated within a development agreement under the authority of RCW 36.70B.170 and including binding site plans to be approved in conjunction with site plan review under RMC 4-9-200; provided that a development agreement approved under the authority of RCW 36.70B.170 may include standards and decision criteria that apply to a binding site plan application in lieu of the standards and criteria contained in this Section. D. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: 1. General Requirements: All applications for binding site plans must conform to the requirements of RMC 4-8-120. E. DESIGN STANDARDS FOR BINDING SITE PLANS: 1. Legal Lots: Lots, parcels, or tracts created through the binding site plan procedure shall be legal lots of record. The number of lots, tracts, parcels, sites, or divisions shall not exceed the number of lots allowed in the applicable zoning district. 2. Access: All lots shall provide access to a public street, or to a public street by means of an access easement or other recorded instrument approved by the City. 3. Dedication Statement: Where lands are required or proposed for dedication, the applicant shaff provide a dedication statement and acknowledgement on the binding site plan. 4. Access to Utilities: Each parcel created by the binding site plan shaff have access to water supply, sanitary sewer, and utilities by means of direct access or access easement approved by the City. 5. Shared Conditions: The Administrator may authorize sharing of open space, parking, access and other improvements among contiguous properties s,ubject to the binding site plan. Conditions of use, maintenance and restrictions on redevelopment of shared open space, parking, access and other improvements shall be identified on the binding site plan and enforced by covenants, easements or other similar mechanisms. . H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg.doc Page 6 of 12 ' .---- F. REQUIRED IMPROVEMENTS: 1. Improvements: The following tangible improvements shall be provided for, either by actual construction or a construction schedule approved by the City and bonded by the applicant, before a binding site plan may be recorded: grading and paving of streets and alleys, installation of curbs, gutters, sidewalks, monuments, sanitary and storm sewers, street lights, water mains and street name signs, together with all appurtenances thereto to specifications and standards of this code, approved by the Department and in accordance with other standards of the City. A separate construction permit will be required for any such improvements, along with associated engineering plans prepared per the City Drafting Standards. 2. Phasing of Improvements: To satisfy these requirements, the Administrator is authorized to impose conditions and limitations on the binding site plan. If the Administrator determines that any delay in satisfying requirements will not adversely impact the public health, safety or welfare, the Administrator may allow requirements to be satisfied prior to issuing the first building permit for the site, or prior to issuing the first building permit for any phase, or prior to issuing a specific building's certificate of occupancy, or in accordance with an approved phasing plan, or in accordance with plans established by a development agreement or as otherwise permitted or required under City code. G. ACCESS REQUIREMENTS: Access requirements and street design and development standards shall be provided in accordance with RMC 4-6-060, unless superseded by the terms of a development agreement as provided by RMC 4-7-230J. New public roads shall be provided for lot access where determined by the Administrator to be reasonably necessary as a result of the proposed development or to make appropriate provisions for public roads. Establishment of public roads may also be proposed by the applicant. H. PERMIT PROCEDURES FOR BINDING SITE PLAN APPROVAL: 1. Permit Type: Binding site plans shall be processed as Type III permits in accordance with the procedures in chapter 4-8 RMC for Type III permits and the standards and criteria.set forth in this Section, unless the applicant elects to merge the binding site plan application with the site plan review process or combined site plan/planned action review process in which case the binding site plan shall be processed in accordance with the procedures set out in chapters 4-8 and 4-9 RMC. If a binding site plan permit is processed concurrently, but not merged with another permit process, then the binding site plan application shall be processed as a Type III permit. 2. Review Authority: Pursuant to chapter 4-8 RMC, the responsible Reviewing Official for a binding site plan application shall be the Administrator, unless the applicant elects to have the binding site plan application merged with a Type VI permit site plan application or a development agreement under chapter 36.70B RCW. If a binding site plan H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg.doc Page 7 of 12 ------------------------------------------~--...... application is to be processed with a Type VI site plan, then the responsible Reviewing Official shall be the Hearing Examiner. If a binding site plan application is to be processed with a development agreement, the responsible Reviewing Official shall be the City Council. The final decision on a development agreement with an application for a binding site plan shall be made by City Council. No administrative appeal of the City Council decision shall be available. I. MERGER WITH SITE PLAN: 1. Review Standards for a Previously Approved Site Plan: If a previously approved site plan is submitted in conjunction with an application for binding site plan approval, the conditions and limitations imposed by the Administrator may, where appropriate, include any conditions and limitations contained in the previously approved site plan. Subsequent site development permits for the land will still be subject to compliance with the zoning, building, and other applicable land use codes and regulations existing at the time of development permit review, unless addressed as part of the binding site plan review and expressly depicted on the binding site plan. 2. Review Standards for Concurrent Site Plan Application: When a binding site plan is being considered concurrently with another land development application, the Administrator will incorporate all conditions and limitations imposed on the concurrent application into the binding site plan. Subsequent site development permits for the land will still be subject to compliance with the zoning, building, and other applicable land use codes and regulations existing at the time of development permit review, unless addressed as part of the binding site plan review and expressly depicted on the binding site plan. J. MERGER WITH DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: If a binding site plan is merged with a development agreement, in the event of a conflict between the terms of the development agreement and this Section, the terms of the development agreement shall control. K. REVIEW AUTHORITY DECISION: 1. Action: The responsible Reviewing Official shall review and act upon binding site plans based upon the general criteria in this Section and other criteria applicable to the site plan or development agreement with which the applicant elects to merge the binding site plan application. Every decision made under this Section shall include findings of fact and conclusions to support the decision. 2. Approval: If the Reviewing Official finds the proposed binding site plan is in conformance to the standards and requirements of this Section, then it shall be approved. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg. doc Page 8. of 12 .------ 3. Approval with Modifications: If modification(s) are deemed necessary by the Reviewing Official, then they may be added to the binding site plan or a revised binding site plan may be required. The applicant shall be notified of any such modification action. 4. Referral to the Hearing Examiner: Except when a binding site plan is merged with a development agreement, if the Administrator determines that there are sufficient concerns by residents in the area of the binding site plan, or by City staff, to warrant a public hearing, then he/she shall refer the binding site plan to the Hearing Examiner for public hearing and decision by the Hearing Examiner. Notice of the public hearing will be given as for a Type VI permit hearing. Binding site plans merged with development agreements shall be approved by City Council pursuant to the requirements of RCW 36.70B.170 et seq. 5. Denial: If the binding site plan is denied by the Reviewing Official, the applicant shall be notified in writing of the decision, stating the reasons therefor. 6. Reconsideration: Any party may request that an application, on which the Reviewing Official has made a decision, be reopened by the Reviewing Official if it is found that new information that was not previously available has come to light that might affect the action taken by the Reviewing Official. Requests for reconsideration must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the date of the decision. L. RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION: Where dedication of right-of-way is required for the approved binding site plan or proposed by the applicant, the dedication shall require separate approval by City Council prior to recording of the binding site plan with record of survey. The dedication shall be effective upon recording of the binding site plan with record of survey. M. SURVEY AND RECORDING: Prior to recording, the approved binding site plan shall be surveyed and the final recording forms shall be prepared by a professional land surveyor, licensed in the State of Washington. In addition to the requirements of RMC 4-8-120C, surveys shall include those items prescribed by RCW 58.09.060, Records of survey, contents -Record of corner, information. 1. Administrator Approval: The binding site plan must be signed by the Administrator before it is filed. The final approved binding site plan shall remain with the City until such time as the applicant requests that the binding site plan be recorded. 2. Filing by City Clerk: The approved binding site plan will be sent to the City Clerk by the Department when the binding site plan is final and all H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7 -170 leg. doc Page 9 of 12 ----------------------------------~ .. -. prerequisites to filing have been completed. The binding site plan shall be filed by the City Clerk for record in the office of the King County Auditor and shall not be deemed approved until so filed. N. BINDING EFFECT: 1. Vesting: Upon filing of a complete application for a binding site plan, the application shall be considered under the binding site plan ordinance, the zoning, and other development regulations in effect on the date of application for the land uses and development identified in the binding site plan application or identified in a complete site plan review application filed in conjunction with or processed concurrently with a binding site plan application. 2. Legal Lots: Lots, parcels, or tracts created through the binding site plan procedure shall be legal lots of record. 3. Binding: Approved binding site plans shall be binding and shall be enforceable by the City. All provisions, conditions and requirements of the binding site plan shall be legally enforceable on the purchaser or on any person acquiring a lease or other ownership interest of any lot, tract, or parcel created pursuant to the binding site plan. A sale, transfer, or lease of any lot, tract, or parcel created pursuant to the binding site plan that does not conform to the requirements of the binding site plan approval, shall be considered a violation of this Section, shall be a nuisance and may be subject to an injunction action in Superior Court or such other remedies provided by City code. O. EXPIRATION AND EXTENSION: 1. Expiration Period: For binding site plans not merged with a site plan or development agreement, the approval shall lapse unless submitted for recording within five (5) years of the binding site plan approval. 2. Expiration Period for Merged Approvals: For binding site plans approved as part of merged application with a site plan or development agreement, the binding site plan shall lapse when the site plan or development agreement expires unless submitted for recording prior to the date of expiration for the merged application. 3. Extension of Expiration Period: Additional time extensions beyond the five (5) year time period may be granted by the Administrator if the applicant can show need caused by unusual circumstances or situations which make it unduly burdensome to file the binding site plan within the five (5) year time period. The applicant must file a written request with the Administrator for this additional time extension; this request must be filed at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. The request must include documentation as to the need for the additional time period. Additional time extensions may be H;\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg.doc Page 10 of 12 \ .------~ granted in not greater than one year increments, up to a maximum of two (2) years. 4. Extension of Expiration Period for Phased Projects: In the case of a phased binding site plan, submittal for recording of any phase of the binding site plan will constitute an automatic one year extension for the submittal of the next phase of the binding site plan. P. APPEALS: See RMC 4-8-11 OH. Q. ALTERATION OR VACATION: 1. Alteration: Alteration of an approved binding site plan, excluding standard easements for utilities and lot line adjustments, shall be accomplished following the same procedures required for a new binding site plan application as set forth in this Section; provided, that only owners of lots within the binding site plan that are directly affected by the proposed alteration shall be required to authorize application for the alteration. If a binding site plan application was approved as part of a development agreement approval process as provided in subsection H2 of this Section or if property subject to a binding site plan approval is the subject of a development agreement, the alteration of the approved binding site plan shall not require an amendment to the development agreement or approval by the City Council and, after approval and recording, shall automatically be incorporated within the development agreement unless otherwise provided in the development agreement. 2. Vacation: Vacation of a recorded binding site plan shall be accomplished by following the same procedures required for a new binding site plan application as set forth in this Section. If a portion of a binding site plan is vacated, the property subject to the vacation shall constitute one lot, and the balance of the approved binding site plan shall remain as approved. If a binding site plan application was approved as part of a development agreement approval process or if property subject to a binding site plan approval is the subject of a development agreement, the vacation of the approved binding site plan, whether total or partial, shall not require an amendment to the development agreement or approval by the City Council and, after approval and recording shall automatically be incorporated within the development agreement unless otherwise provided in the development agreement. (Ord. 4954, 2-11-2002) 4-7-240 VARIANCES: A. AUTHORITY: A variance from the requirements of this Chapter may be approved by the Hearing Examiner for a short plat, or a variance for a full subdivision recommended to and approved by the City Council, pursuant to RMC 4-9-2508. (Amd. Ord. 4954, 2-11-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg. doc Page 11 of 12 ~------------~--------------------~--.... , .. 4-7-250 VIOLATIONS OF THIS CHAPTER AND PENALTIES: Penalties for any violations of any of the provisions of this Chapter shall be in accord with chapter 1-3 RMC. (Ord. 4522, 6-5-1995; Amd. Ord. 4856, 8-21-2000; Ord. 4954, 2-11-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 7 updated from MRSC 4-7-170 leg.doc Page 12 of 12 ,\ DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ' .. ,r.ITY OF RENTON .~.,'. , '!1 'AUG 2 6 200ft. HcCEIVED 4-8-120 D 9 DEFINITIONS I to be amended by the following revisions 9. Definitions I: Installer Certification: Washington State Department of Community, Trade and Economic Development (CTED) approval given to those contractors authorized to install manufactured homes and designated by a State registration number. (Ord. 4587, 3-18-1996) Inventory of Existing Sites: An inventory of the providers existing facilities with the Renton City corporate limits, and any other facilities outside the City limits that are within one-half (1/2) mile of the proposed facility. The inventory is to include specific information about the location, height, and design of each facility. The Department may share such information with other applicants applying for administrative approvals or conditional use permits under this Title or other organizations seeking to locate antennas within the City, provided, however that the Department is not, by sharing such information, in any way representing or warranting that such sites are available or suitable. Irrigation Sprinkler System (Underground)Plans (Underground): A twenty two inch by thirty four inch (22" x 34") plan drawn at the same scale as, or included on, the generalized utilities plan(s) (or other size plan sheet or scale approved by the Development Services Division Plan Review Supervisor) clearly indicating the following: a. Scale and north arrow, b. Dimensions of all property lines, easements, and abutting streets, c. Meter location and size, and d. Proposed type, size, and location of sprinkler irrigation piping, sprinkler heads, and backflow prevention devices. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 D 9leg.doc Page 1 of 1 12. Definitions L: Land Record Number: The City of Renton Technical Services Division's filing number for the final surv'ey document. Land Use Permit Conditions: Environmental or land use permit requirements which may have been placed upon the project in addition to any code-mandated requirements in conjunction with a required environmental determination and/or a land use permit. Examples of land use permits include site plan review, conditional use permits and variances. Landscapingg Plan, Conceptual: A fully dimensioned plan drawn at the same scale as the project site plan (or other scale approved by the Development Services Division), clearly indicating the following: a. Date, graphic scale, and north arrow, b. Location of proposed buildings, parking areas, access and existing buildings to remain, c. Names and locations of abutting streets and public improvements, including easements, , d. Existing and proposed contours at fivetwo foot (~a') intervals or less, e. Location and size of planting areas, f. Location and height for proposed berming, g. Location and elevations for any proposed landscape-related structures such as arbors, gazebos, fencing, etc., and h. Location, size, spacing and names of existing and proposed shrubs, trees, ground covers, and decoratiVe rockery or like landscape improvements in relationship to proposed and existing utilities. i. Identification of trees to be removed. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 D 121eg.docH:\EDNSP\Comp Plan'Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning Implement GMA\Chapter g updated from MRSC.doc Page 1 of ~4G D ... ~ ) , Landscapiflgg Plan, Detailed: A fully dimensioned plan drawn at the same scale as the project site plan (or other scale approved by the Development Services Division), clearly indicating the following: a. Date, graphic scale, and north arrow, b. Location of proposed buildings, property lines, walks, parking areas, aR4-access, and existing buildings to remain, c. Names and locations of abutting streets and public improvements, including easements, d. Existing and proposed contours at fi¥e-two foot (a,g') intervals or less, e. Detailed grading plan, f. Location and dimensions of planting areas (the width of a landscaping area when curbed shall be measured from inside to inside of the curbs), g. Location and height for proposed berming, h. Locations, elevations, and details for any proposed landscape-related structures such as arbors, gazebos, fencing, etc., L Location, size, spacing, condition (Le. "container"), and botanical and common names of existing and proposed shrubs, trees, and ground covers, and decorative rockery or like landscape improvements in relationship to proposed and existing utilities, j. Location and type (Le. "rockery") of proposed and existing landscape improvements in relation to proposed and existing utilities. j,ls. Names and location of existing and proposed vegetation to remain" aM I. Location, name, and size of trees to be removed, and m. Detailed planting plan including soil mix, topSOil depth, mulch depth, and staking details for deciduous and evergreen trees. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 D 12Ieg.docH:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning Implement GMA\Chapter g updated from MRSC.doc Page 2 of ~4G . I k. Detailed planting plan (soil mix, planting depth and ' .... idth, and bark mulch depth). Lease Agreement, Draft: A draft lease agreement with the landholder, or separate equivalent documentation that: a. Allows the landholder to enter into leases with other providers; and b. Specifies that if the provider fails to remove the facility upon six (6) months of its discontinued use, the responsibility for removal falls upon the landholder. Letter from Property Owner: A letter from the private property owner granting permission for the temporary use of the property. Letter of Conformance with Geotechnical Report: A letter submitted by the applicant stating structural plans were prepared consistent with the findings of the geotechnical report and stamped by a structural engineer. The plans and specifications shall be accompanied by a letter from the geotechnical engineer who prepared the geotechnical report stating that in his or her judgment, the plans and specifications conform to the recommendations in the geotechnical report and the risk of damage to the proposed development site and downslope properties from potentially hazardous conditions will be minimal subject to the conditions set forth in the report. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) Letter of Understanding Geologic Risk: The applicant, or the owner of the site, shall submit a letter to the City, with the plans and specifications, stating that he or she understands and accepts the risk of developing in an unstable area and that he or she will advise, in writing, any prospective purchasers of the site, or any prospective purchasers of structures or portions of structures on the site, of the unstable potential of the area. (Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000) List of Current Property Owners: A listing of all current property owners and their mailing addresses and King County Assessor's account numbers within three hundred feet (300') of the boundaries of the subject site as obtained from a title company or the King County Assessor's office. The list shall include a notarized statement from the applicant attesting that the ownership information provided is current and accurate. Current shall mean obtained within the past thirty (30) days unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. Lot Line Adjustment Map: A drawing of the proposed lot line adjustment prepared on an eighteen inch by twenty four inch (18" x 24") sheet of mylar by a licensed land surveyor complying with the City's surveying standards. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-] 20 D 12 leg.docH:\EDNSP\Comp PlaH\AmeHdmeHts\GMA Update\ZoHiHg ImplemeHt GMA\Chapter g updated from MRSC.doc Page 3 of.2.49 & a. Name of the proposed lot line adjustment (e:g., Smith/Larsen Lot Line Adjustment), b. Space reserved for "City of Renton File Number" (large type) at top of first sheet, c. Space reserved for City of Renton "land record number" (small type) at bottom left of first sheet, d. Legal description for each of the existing parcels. If a metes and bounds description is used, it must be stamped by a licensed surveyor, e. (Rep. by Ord. 4751, 11-16-1998), f. Date, graphic scale (one inch equals forty feet (1" = 40'), unless otherwise approved by the Department}, and north arrow, . g. Names, locations, widths, types, and dimensions of adjacent and on- site streets, alleys, and easements, h. Lot lines with all property lines dimensioned and square footage of each lot, . i. Parcels identified as Lot 4, Lot 3, etc., j. "Old" lot line(s} and "new" lot line(s} clearly labeled and differentiated by line type and/or thickness (indicated distance(s) moved}, k. Addresses for,each lot and new street names in accordance with the street grid system regulations of chapter 9-11 RMC, I. Total square footage of existing and revised lots, m. Ground floor square footage of all structures, n. Location, dimensions and square footage of any existing structures to remain, and dimensioned distances to property lines, H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 D 12 1eg.docH:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning Implement GMA\Chapter g updated from MRSC.doc Page 4 of.2.4G o. Location of existing conditions (such as wetlands, steep slopes, watercourses) on or adjacent to the site which could hinder development. p. Reservations, restrictive covenants. easements. description of any areas to be dedicated to public use with notes stating their purpose. and any limitations, and identifying the grantee and if the grantee is the City, a statement of provisions reserving, granting and!or conveying the area with a description of the rights and purposes must be shown, q. Coordinates per City surveying standards for permanent control monuments, r. Location of all interior permanent control monuments per City surveying standards, s. Statement of equipment and procedure used per WAC 332-130-100, t. Basis of bearing per WAC 332-130-150(1)(b)(iii), u. Date the existing monuments were visited per WAC 332-103- 050(1 )(f)(iv), v. Verification that permanent markers are set at corners of the proposed lots, ' w. Statement of discrepancies, if any, between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated. x. Surveyor's testament, stamp and signature, y. Certification by a State of Washington licensed land surveyor that a survey has been made and thatmonuments and stakes have been set, z. Notarized signatures of all property owners having an interest in the property, certifying ownership and approval of the proposal, aa. Signature and date line(s) for the King County Assessor, bb. Signature and date line(s) for the Administrator of the Planning!Building! Public Works Department. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\ZONING\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 D 12 leg.docH:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Updat~ZoniRg Implement GMA\Chapter g updated from MRSC.doc Page 5 of ~4G & r .... v B BUILDING APPLICATIONS , TYPE OF Demolition Grading/Fill APPLICATION/PERMIT SUBMIITAL REQUIREMENTS Applicant Agreement Statement (for wireless communications facilities only) Application Form, Building Division 1 2 Application Form, Construction Permit 2 Architectural Elevations Architectural Plans, CommerciaVlndustrlaVAttached Dwellings 3+ Units Architectural Plans, Detached/Semi-Attached Dwellings and 2 Attached Dwellings Blocking/ Anchoring/Skirting Details Construction Mitigation Description 1 DEVELOPMENT PLANNtNG CITY OF RENTON AUG 2 62004 RECEIVED TABLE 4-8-120B Manufactured Manufactured Home Multl- Home In Outside Famlly/CommerclaV Manufactured of Industrial New or Home Park Manufactured Additions Home Park 3 1 1 2 2 5 4 2 2 CommerclaVlndustrlal Interior Remodel 1 3(n) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 B leg. doc Page 1 of 1: TA8LE 4-8-1208 BUILDING APPLICATIONS to be amended by the following revisions Single Single FamllylMulti- PooVSpa Sign Family/Duplex Family New or Additions Interior Remodel 1 1 1 1 2 I 2 2 I ! , I • . ~ "'. ~,. "-.J Drainage Plans Z.' .-5 2(h) " .. Drainage Report 2 Electrical Plans 2 2 1(g) Energy Code Checklist, Nonresidential 1(m) 1 Energy Code Checklist, Residential 1(k) 1 1(a) Foundation Plans 2 4 2 2 Geotechnical Report 2(b) 4 2(b) Grading Plan 5 5 Grading Work Description 4 2 Hazardous Materials Management Statement 2(0) 2(0) 2(0) 2(0) 2(0) 2(0) 2(0) Heat Loss Calculation 1 (c) 1 (c) Installer Certification 1 Inventory of Existing Sites (for wireless 3 communications facilities only) Irrigation S~FiAkleF System Plans 3 I King County Health Department-Approved Plans 1 (f)' 1 (f) 1(g) Land Use Permit Conditions,Approved (if any) 2 2 2 1 Landsca~ PlaAsPlan, Detailed J 4 I Lease Agreement, Draft (for wireless 3 communications facilities only) Manufacturer's Plans 2 Mechanical Plans 3 - 2 --- Plumbing Plans 2(m) 2 Project Information Sheet (includes legal 2 2 2 5 3(n) 2 2 2 description) Receipt for Construction (Utility) Permit 2 1 (h) Application Roadway. C~nstruction Plan 2 i -- H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\ZOrung -Implement GMA\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 B leg.doc Page 2 of.1 ~ ,/. Screening Detail, Refuse/Recycling 3 Service Area Map (for wireless communications 3 facilities only) Side Sewer Capping Permit, Finaled 1 Sign Plan 3 Site Plan, Commercial, Industrial, Multi-Family 5 1 Site Plan, Sign 2 Site Plan, Single Family/Duplex 2 2 2(d) 2 Source Statement, Fill Material, Aquifer 2(p) 2(p) 2(p) 2(p) 2(p) 2(p) 2(p) Protection Areas Structural Calculations 2 3 2(e) 2(g) 2 2(i) Structural Plans 2 3 2(e) 2(g) 2 20) Topography Map (may be combined with site 2 2 2 4 2 plan or grading plan) Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan, Approved 2 3 2(d) Utilities Construction Plans 6 1 Water/Sewer Availability Letter 10)(k) 10) 1 (a)O) Water Service Disconnect Request (final) 1 WSEC Trade-Off Form 1 (I) Table 4-8,1206 Legend: I a. Required for any alteration of exterior of (heated) building envelope. b. When required·by Section 1804 (Foundations and Retaining Walls) of the U6C. c. Required for installation of a new furnace or a replacement of greater size. , d. Not required for pools/spaslhot tubs to be Installed within an existing building. e. Required for structural changes only. I. Required for food service establishments only. g. Required only for public poolsispaslhot tubs (not required for single family or duplex poolsispas/hot tubs). h. Required for duplexes only. I. Required for other than conventional construction. -j. Required only if trade-off option Is being used for compliance. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 B leg.doc Page 3 of ~ 4P .', .... :, k. For mUlti-family. one per building. I. Not required for additions. m. Not required for multi-family projects. n. For restaurants and any construction project involving work in the right-of-way, four (4) copies are required. o. Required only when project is located In an Aquifer Protection Area and (1) construction vehicles will be refueled on site and/or (2) the quantity of hazardous materials that will be stored, dispensed, used, and handled on the construction site, exciusive of the quantity of hazardous materials contained in fuel or fluid reservoirs of construction vehicles will exceed twenty (20) gallons. Weight of solid hazardous materials will be converted to volumes for purposes of determining whether de minimis amount is exceeded. Ten (10) pounds shall be considered equal to one gallon. p. Required only when project is located in an Aquifer Protection Area. (Ord. 4587, 3-18-1996; Amd_ Ord. 4773. 3-22-1999; Ord. 4835. 3-27-2000; Ord. 4851. 8-7-2000; Ord. 4992.12-9-2002) The number of copies (if any) Is indicated in each column unless waived by the Development Services Division. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 8 updated from MRSC 4-8-120 B leg.doc Page 4 of 1 G ~ ~z .~ ~~ ~~ c.c UJu. C'I :iO c.o ~~ ::l ..,J-« wc.> >. w 0 Q §! -W (.) W a:: 4-9-195 ROUTINE VEGETATION IVIANAGEMENT PERMITS to be amended by the following revisions 4-9-195 ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMITS: A. PURPOSE: This Section provides a permit process for routine vegetation management implementing the tIree GQutting and J1and GQlearing regulations in RMC 4-4- 130. B. AUTHORITY: The City's Development Services Division Director, or ffis-the duly authorized representative, is hereby authorized and directed to interpret and enforce all the provisions of this Section. C. APPLICABILITY, EXEMPTIONS, AND PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES: 1. General Applicability: The regulations of this Section apply to any developed, partially developed~ or undeveloped property where routine vegetation management activities are undertaken. a. Permit Required for Routine Vegetation Management on Undeveloped Properties: Any person who performs routine vegetation management on undeveloped property in the City must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. b. Permit Required to Use Mechanical Equipment: Except where use of mechanical equipment is specifically listed as exempt, any person who uses mechanical equipment for routine vegetation management, land clearing, tree cutting, landscaping, or gardening on developed, partially developed~ or undeveloped property must obtain a routine vegetation management permit prior to performing such work. c. Tree Cutting -Solar Access or Pasture Land: A routine vegetation management permit is required for tree cutting in greater amounts than specified under partially exempt actions in RMC 4-4-130C2~, Allowable Minor Tree Cutting Activities, for any property where tree cutting is proposed without an associated land development permit. A routine vegetation management permit may be issued allowing tree cutting only in the following cases: i. For purposes of allowing solar access to existing structures; or ii. To create pasture land where agricultural activities are permitted uses in the zone. Any tree cutting activities shall be the minimum necessary to accomplish the purpose, and shall be co'nsistent with RMC 4-4-130D2, Restrictions for Critical Areas. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-1951eg.doc~1~3 4·9·195 ROUTINE VEGETATION MANAGEMENT PERMITS to be amended by the following revisions 2. Exemptions: Refer to RMC 4-4-130C. 3. Prohibited Activities: Refer to RMC 4-4-1300. D. PROCEDURES AND REVIEW CRITERIA: Permits for fBoutine y~egetation mManagement shall be processed as follows: 1. Submittal: An application for a fBoutine v~egetation mManagement permit shall be submitted to the Development Services Division together with any necessary fees as required in chapter RMC 4-1-RMG. 2. Information Required: A fBoutine y~egetation mManagement permit application shall contain the information requested in RMC 4-8-120, Submittal Requirements -Specific to Application Type. 3. Time: The permit shall be reviewed administratively within a reasonable period of time. 4. Routine Vegetation Management Permit Conditions: The fBoutine v~egetation mManagement permit may be denied or conditioned by the City to restrict the timing and extent of aCtivities in order to further the intent of this Section including: a. Preserve and enhance the City's aesthetic character and maintain visual screening and buffering. b. Preserve habitat to the greatest extent feasible. c. Prevent landslides, accelerated 'soil creep, settlement and subsidence hazards. d. Minimize the potential for flooding, erosion, or increased turbidity, siltation or other form§ of pollution in a watercourse. e. Ensure that the proposal will be consistent with RMC 4-4-13002, Restrictions for Critical Areas, and 03, Restrictions for Critical Areas - Routine Vegetation Management Permits. 5. Time Limits for Routine Vegetation Management Permits: Any permit for fBoutine v~egetation mManagement shall be valid for one year from the date of issuance. An extension may be granted by the Development Services Division for a period of one year upon application by the property owner or H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-195 leg.doc Page 2 of 3 '. 4-9-195 ROUTINE VEGETATION tvlANAGEMENT PERMITS to be amended by the following revisions manager. Application for such an extension must be made at least thirty (30) days in advance of the expiration of the original permit and shall include a statement of justification for the extension. E. APPEALS: Appeal of the decision to grant, grant with conditions, or deny a f.8outine v~egetation mManagement permit shall be made consistent with RMC 4-8-110, Appeals. F. VIOLATIONS AND PENALTIES: See RMC 4-4-130J, Violations and Penalties, and RMC 1-3-2. (Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-195Ieg.doc~3...Q[3 , . Ni p\J'NNING . OE"ELOPtJtO~ f\ENiON erN . . UGl 6 l00~ 4-9-200E fl.: to be amended by adding the following revisions R~~~~gN CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN AND MASTER PLANS: The Reviewing Official shall review and act upon plans based upon a finding that the proposal meets comprehensive planning considerations and the criteria in this subsection and in subsection F of this Section, as applicable. These criteria also provide a frame of reference for the applicant in developing a site, but are not intended to discourage creativity and innovation. Review criteria include the following: 1. General Review Criteria for Both Master Plans and Site Plan Review: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan, its elements and policies. In determining compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, conformance to the objectives and policies of the specific land use designation shall be given consideration over city-wide objectives and policies; b. Conformance with existing land use regulations; c. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses; d. Mitigation of impacts of the proposed site plan to the site; e. Conservation of areawide property values; f. Safety and efficiency of vehicle and pedestrian circulation; g. Provision of adequate light and air; h. Mitigation of noise, odors and other harmful or unhealthy conditions; i. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; and j. Prevention of neighborhood deterioration and blight. k. Additional Special Review Criteria for COR, UC-N1, and UC-N2 Zones Only: i. The plan is consistent with a Planned Action Ordinance, if applicable; and H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\zoning -Implement GMA\4-9-200E.doc Page 1.Q[3 ---- 4·9-200E to be amended by adding the following revisions ii. The plan creates a yom pact, urban development that includes a '.' compatible mix of uses that meets the Comprehensive Plan vision and policy statements for the Center Office Residential or Urban Center North Comprehensive Plan designations; and iii. The plan provides an overall urban design concept that is internally consistent, and provides quality <;ievelopment; and iv. The plan incorporates public and private open spaces to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site, and/or to protect existing natural systems; and v. The plan provides view corridors to the shoreline area and Mt. Rainier where applicable; and vi. Public access is provided tO,water and/or shoreline areas; and vii. The plan provides distinctive focal points such as public area plazas, prominent architectural features, or other items; and viii. Public and/or private streets are arranged in a layout that provides reasonable access to property and supports the land use envisioned; and ix. The plan accommodates and promotes transit, pedestrian, and other alternative modes of transportation. I. Additional Criteria for the UC-N1 and UC-N2 Zones O""ly: i. The plan conforms to the approved conceptual plan required by development agreement for the subarea in question, if applicable. ii. The plan conforms with the intent and the mandatory elements of the design guidelines located in RMC 4-3-100. The Master Plan clearly identifies the urban design concept for each district enunciated in the Urban Center North Comprehensive Plan policies. iii. The proposed interconnected circulation network must demonstrate the function and location of required circulation elements required in RMC 4-3-100. Internal or local roads shall provide adequate edges and buffers to parking lots. A sufficient number of pedestrian-oriented streets are designated to implement H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement 6MA\4-9-200E.doc Page 2-.Qf3 , . 4-9-200E to be amended by adding the following revisions the Vision for each District in the Urban Center North Comprehensive Plan designation. iv. Gateways are designated consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and conceptual plans for the gateway demonstrate the design concept for gateway treatment and identify significant gateway features to be provided. v. The Master Plan includes a sequencing element that explains what phases of the Master Plan will be built-out first, and in what order the phases will be built, and an estimated time frame. m. Additional Critera for the Airport Influence Area i. The plan conforms to RMC 4-3-020: Airport Compatible Land Use Restrictions. 2. Waiver of Further Consideration of Site Plan Criteria: Approval of a Master Plan which was not combined with a Site Plan application may have satisfied portions of subsection F of this Section. The Reviewing Official or his or her designee has discretion to waive those portions of the requirements that have been satisfied by the Master Plan approval. Whenever the Zoning Administrator or his or her designee has discretion to note those portions of the requirements as having been satisfied by the Master Plan approval, such sections of the Code shall be detailed and that portion of the approved Master Plan wherein the requirements were satisfied shall be cited by the Reviewing Official or his or her designee in the approval of subsequent phases and further consideration of them waived. (Ord.4802, 10-25-1999; Amd. Ord. 5028, 11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\zoning -Implement GMA\4-9-200E.doc .Page 3 of3 4-9-200F ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW to be amended by the following revisions F. ADDITIONAL REVIEW CRITERIA FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW: The interpretation of the following criteria, particularly references to the "intent of the zoning code," shall consider the purpose and intent of the applicable land use designation of the Land Use Element and the Objectives and Policies of the Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Community Design Element is specifically intended to guide the intrepretation of issues concerning site planning, architectural fit, of development landscaping, the context of the project relative to the existing neighborhood. Approval of plans subject to these critera requires the additional finding that the project complies with the intent and pOlicies of the Land Use Designation and Community Design Element of the Comprehensive Plan. 1. Review of Impacts to Surrounding Properties and Uses: a. Mitigation of undesirable impacts of proposed structures and site layouts that could impair the use or enjoyment or potential use of surrounding uses and structures and of the community; b. Mitigation of undesirable impacts when an overscale structure, in terms of size, bulk, height, and intensity, or site layout zoning code standards and the policy direction adopted in the Comprehensive Plan is permitted that violates the spirit and/or intent of the Zoning COOs-and impairs the use, enjoyment or potential use of surrounding properties; c. Provision of a desirable transition and linkage between uses arid to the street, utility, walkway, and trail systems in the surrounding area by the arrangement of landscaping, fencing and/or other buffering techniques, in order to prevent conflicts and to promote coordinated and planned benefit from, and access to, such elements; d. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid overconcentration of structures on a particular portion of a site such that they create a perception of greater height or bulk than intended under the spirit of the Zoning Code; e. Promotion of the efficient function of parking and service areas by effective location, design and screening, to provide integrated facilities between uses when beneficial, to promote urban layouts in appropriate zones, and to prevent unnecessary repetition and conflict between uses and service areas or facilities; H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-200 F leg.doc Page 1.Qf 4 f. Mitigation of the unnecessary and avoidable impacts of new construction on views from existing buildings and future developable sites, recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features and of promoting urban settings in appropriate zones; g. Provision of effective screening from public streets and residential uses for all permitted outdoor storage areas (except auto and truck sales), for surface mounted utility equipment, for rooftop eqUipment, and for all refuse and garbage containers, in order to promote a urban setting where appropriate and to preserve the effect and intent of screening or buffering otherwise required by the Zoning Code; h. Consideration of placement and design of exterior lighting in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. 2. Review of Impacts of a Proposed Site Plan to the Site: a. Provision for privacy and noise reduction by building placement and . spacing; orientation to views and vistas and to site amenities, to sunlight and prevailing winds, and to pedestrian and vehicle needs; b. Consideration of placement and scale of proposed structures in relation to the openness and natural characteristics of a site in order to avoid overconcentration or the impression of oversized structures; c. Preservation of the desirable natural landscape through retention of existing vegetation and limited soil removal, insofar as the natural characteristics will enhance the proposed development; d. Use of existing topography to reduce undue cutting, filling and retaining walls in order to prevent erosion and unnecessary stormwater runoff, and to preserve stable natural slopes and desirable natural vegetation; . e. Limitation of paved or impervious surfaces, where feasible, to reduce runoff and increase natural infiltration; f. Design and protection of planting areas so that they are not susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements; g. Consideration of building form and placement and landscaping to enhance year-round conditions of sun and shade both on-site and on adjacent properties .and to promote energy conservation. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-200 F leg.doc Page 2 of 4 3. Review of Circulation and Access: a. Provision of adequate and safe vehicular access to and from all properties; b. Arrangement of the circulation pattern so that all ingress and egress movements may occur at as few pOints as possible along the public street, the points being capable of channelization for turning movements; c. Consolidation of access points with adjacent properties, when feasible; d. Coordination of access points on a superblock basis so that vehicle conflicts and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts are minimized; e. Orientation of access 'points to side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arteria:l streets, when feasible; . , f. Promotion of the safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; g. Separation of loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; h. Provisions for transi<and carpool facilities and access where appropriate;_ and ~ '. : ~ i. Provision for safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. I 4. Review of Signage: a. Employment of signs primarily for the purpose of identification; b. Management of sig!,,) elements, such as size, location and arrangement so that signs complement the visual character of the surrounding area and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; c. Limitation of the number of signs to avoid visual clutter and distraction; H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-200 F leg.doc Page 3..Q[ 4 . \: / d. Moderation of surface brightness or lighting intensity except for that necessary for sign visibility; and e. Provision of an identification system to allow for quick location of buildings and addresses. 5. Special Review Criteria for Hazardous Waste Treatment and Storage Facilities: a. Above-ground hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be constructed with containment controls which will prevent the escape of hazardous wastes in the event of an accidental release from the facility. Such controls shall conform with all adopted Federal, State and local design and construction standards; b. Underground hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall comply with RMC 4-5-120, Underground Storage Tank Secondary Containment Regulations; c. Hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall comply with article 80 of the Uniform Fire Code as adopted by ordinance by the City of Renton; d. A hazardous waste spill contingency plan for immediate implementation in the event of a release of hazardous wastes at the facility shall be reviewed and approved by the Renton Fire Department prior to issuance of any permits; and e. The location of all on-site and off-site facilities must comply with the State siting criteria as adopted in accordance with RCW 70.105.210. 6. Review of Street Frontage Landscape: A mix of hard surfaces, structured planters, and terraces may be incorporated into street frontage landscape buffers where such features would enhance the desired streets cape character for that particular neighborhood. 7. Review of Compliance to Design Guidelines for Development in CD, RM-U, RM-T, UC-N1, and UC-N2 Zones: Development proposed in the zones where design guidelines are in effect must show how they comply with the intent and the mandatory elements of the design guidelines located in RMC 4-3-100. (Ord. 3981, 4-7-1986; Ord. 4186,11-14-1988; Amd. Ord. 4802,10-25-1999; Ord. 4851,8-7-2000; Ord. 4854, 8-14-2000; Ord. 5028,11-24-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-200 F leg.doc Page 4 of 4 4-9-250D VARIANCES. WAIVERS. MODIFICATIONS. AND ALTERNATES: D. MODIFICATION PROCEDURES to be amended by the following revisions D. MODIFICATION PROCEDURES: 1. Application Time and Decision Authority: Modification from standards, either in whole or in part, shall be subject to review and decision by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department upon submittal in writing of jurisdiction for such modification. (Amd. Ord. 4777, 4-19-1999) 2. Decision Criteria: Whenever there are practical difficulties involved in carrying out the provisions of this Title, the Department Administrator may grant modifications for individual cases provided he/she shall first find that a specific reason makes the' strict letter of this Code impractical, that the intent and purpose of the governing land use designation of the Comprehensive plant is met and that the modification is in conformity with, the intent and purpose of this Code, and that such modification: a.) Substantially implements the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Element and the Community Design Element and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives. Qa-,-Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and 29,. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; and QG. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-250 D leg.doc Page 1 of 4 : g4 Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and Le. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. (Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995) 3. Additional Decision Criteria Only for Centers Residential Bonus District: For a modification to special development standards in the Centers Residential Bonus District RMC 4 3 095B3, the Departmont shall rely on the recommendations contained within the report on design criteria for modifications prepared by the Economic Development, ~leighborhoods and Strategic Planning Administrator or designee as the basis for approval or denial of the request. In addition to the criteria in subsection 02 of this· Section, the request for modification in the Centers Residential Bonus District shall meet all of thE? following criteria: a. Project uses a modified stroot grid system whore most buildings front on a street. '.lIJhere no public streets exist, a private street grid system within the project is provided. tH2rojoct-oFients resideflual-doveJe.pmeAts--to the street aAd has primary· building entries facing the street. Entries are idontified with a prominent feature or dotail. c. Parking garages are designed in a way which does not dominate the facade of the residential building. "II/hen garages must be located 'A'ith vehicular access in the front due to physical constraints of the proporty, they are stepped back from the facade of the building. d. Parking lots are oriented to minimize their visual impact on the site 3RG-am-Gesigned so that-the size and landscaping support the residential character of the developments in contrast to adjacent commercial areas. e. Project provides direct pedestrian access from the streot fronting tho StHJOO:\g-aRd-ft.e~ack whero parking is located. f-:-W.a~kways throug~~as-afo-well defined and provide access from public sidewalks into the sito. Walkway 'Nidth is a minimum of five feet (5'). Pavers, changes in color, texture or composition of paving are YSe4 g. Pedestrian connections are provided to the surrounding neighborhood. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-250 D leg.doc Page 2 of 4 h. Distinctive building design is provided. No single architectural style is required; however, reliance on standardized "corporate" or "franchise" style is discouraged. i. Exterior materials are attractive even when viewed up close. These materials have texture, pattern, C>f-te.nd themselves to a higl:l-Ievel of quality and dotailing. j. A consistent visual identity is appliod to all sides of buildings 'Nhich can bo seon by tho genoral public. k. A superior level of quality is provided fer materials, detailing and window placemeRt- I. At loast ono of tho following features is incorporated in structures containing threo (3) or more attached dwellings: i. For each dwolling unit, provide at least one architectural projection not less than two feot (2') from the wall plano and not loss than four feet (4') '.vide, or ii. Incorporate b\:lilding modulation to reduco tho overall bulk and mass of building&;-Gf iii. Vertical and horizontal modulation of roof lines and facades of a minimum of two foet (2') at an interval of a minimum of forty feot (40') on a building face or an equivalent standard 'Nhich adds-interest and quality to the project. (Ord. 4777, 4 19 1999; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5 13 2OO2t 4. Additional Decision Criteria Only for Center Office Residential 3 (COR 3) Zone: For a modification to special upper story setback standards in the COR 3 Zone, RMC 4-2-1208, the Department shall rely on the recommendations contained within the Report on Design Criteria for Modifications prepared by the Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Administrator or deSignee as the basis for approval or denial of the request. In addition to the criteria in SUbsection D2 of this Section, the request for modification in the COR 3 Zone requirements for upper story setbacks shall meet all of the following criteria: a. In comparison to the standard upper story setbacks, the proposed building design will achieve the same or better results in terms of solar access to the public shoreline trails/open space and publicly accessible plazas; the building will allow access to sunlight along the public H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendlilents\GMA Update\Zolll11g -Implement GMA\Chapter 9 Updated from MRSC 4-9-250 D leg.doc Page 3 of 4 • i trail/open space system and plazas abutting the shoreline during daytime and seasonal periods projected for peak utilization by pedestrians. b. The building will create a step in perceived height, bulk and scale in comparison to buildings surrounding the subject building. (Amd. Ord. 4802, 10-25-1999) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 9· Updated from MRSC 4-9-250 D leg.doc Page 4 of 4 4-11-060 DEFINITIONS F to be amended by the following revisions Chapter 11 DEFINITIONS 4-11-060 DEFINITIONS F: FACILITY: (For purposes of aquifer protection area regulations contained in RMC 4-3-050, Critical Area Regulations.) AI.I contiguous land within an APA, structures, other appurtenances, and improvements on the land and operations therein inCluding, but not limited to, business, government, and institutional activities where hazardous materials are stored, handled, treated, used or produced in quantities greater than the de minimus amounts specified in RMC 4- 3-050C6a(ii)(1), Activities Exempt from Specified Aquifer Protection Area Requirements. FAMILY: Any number of related individuals, or not more than four (4) unrelated individuals, living together as a single household. FAST FOOD: An eating and drinking establishment identified by a name brand that offers a standard menu, typical business operationlogoj advertising franchise ownership or affiliation, and a corporate architectural prototype building. Franchise fast food typically caters to a market area larger than one neighborhood and is auto-oriented. It may include drive-through service. This definition excludes espresso stands. FILL: A deposit of earth material placed by artificial means. FINAL PLAT: See PLAT, FINAL. FIRE DEPARTMENT: The Renton Fire Department. FIRE FLOW: The measure of the sustained flow of available water for fire fighting at a specific building or within a specific area at twenty (20) pounds per square inch residual pressure. FIRE MARSHAL: The City of Renton Fire Marshal or his/her designee. FLAT: See DWELLING, MULTI-FAMILY. FLOOD or FLOODING: A general and temporary condition of partial or complete inundation of normally dry land areas from: 1. The overflow of inland or tidal waters, and/or 2. The unusual and rapid accumulation of runoff of surface waters from any source. FLOOD CONTROL: Any undertaking for the conveyance, control, and dispersal of flood waters. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 F leg.doc Page 1 of 3 FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM): The official map on which the Federal Insurance Administration has delineated both the areas of special flood hazard and the risk premium zones applicable to the community. ' ; -:.' ." . I FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY: The official report provided by the Federal' Insurance Administration that includes flood profiles, the flood boundary-floodway map and the water surface elevat,on of the base flood. FLOOD, ONE HUNDRED (100) YEAR: The maximum flood expected to occur during a one-hundred (100) year period. FLOODPLAIN: The area subject to a one hundred (100) year flood. FLOODWAY: The channel of river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved in order to discharge the base flood without cumulatively increasing the water,surface elevation more than one foot (1 '). I I I I RWER 1 ! +-_~7A..c.!:::.~OO~D..:..:W~AY";"'(-_-?f I f-___ .,--.:..Fl.:=O.:::.:.OD;..;...PL.::;...Al.:.;...NC----_. _,, ___ ~ FLOODWAY: For purposes of determining the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Master Program in conjunction with the definition of "shoreland," ''floodway'' means those portions of the area of a river valley lying stream ward from the outer limits of a watercourse upon which flood wate'rs are carried during periods of flooding that occur with reasonable regularity, although not necessarily annually, said floodway being identified, unc;:ler normal condition, by changes in surface soil conditions or changes in types or quality of vegetative ground cover condition. The floodway shall not include those lands that can reasonably be expected to be protected flood waters by flood control devices maintained by or maintained under license from the Federal Gqvernment, the State, or a political subdivision of the State. FLOOR AREA, GROSS: The sum of the gross horizontal areas of all floors of a building measured from the exterior face of each wall. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 F leg.doc Page 2 of 3 FLOOR AREA, NET: The total of all floor area of a building, excluding stairwells, elevator shafts, mechanical equipment rooms, interior vehicular parking or loading, and all floors below the ground floor, except when used for human habitation or service to the public. FLOOR AREA RATIO: The gross floor area of all buildings on a lot divided by the lot area. FLOWER/PLANTS AND FLORAL SUPPLY: A business involving the retail sale . of flowers, house plants, and associated floral supplies. FRONT YARD: See YARD REQUIREMENT. FUEL DEALERS: Wholesale distribution of fuels with associated bulk fuel storage. FUELING STATION, VEHICLE: See VEHICLE FUELING STATIONS. THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT OF 1956 (FWPCA): See RMC 4-6-100. (Ord. 2820,1-14-1974; Ord. 3541, 5-4-1981; Ord. 3758,12-5-1983; Ord. 4071, 6-1-1987; Ord. 4716, 4-13-1998; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13- 2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 F leg. doc Page 3 of 3 4-11-120 DEFINITIONS L: 4-11-120 DEFINITIONS L to be amended by the following revisions Chapter 11 DEFINITIONS LABORATORIES, LIGHT MANUFACTURING: A facility in which scientific research, investigation, testing, or experimentation occur. Manufacturing of and sale of products may also occur. LABORATORIES, RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND TESTING: A facility in which scientific research, investigation, testing, or experimentation occur but not including manufacture and sale of products. LAKES: Natural or artificial bodies of water of two (2) or more acres and/or where the deepest part of the basin at low water exceeds two (2) meters (6.6 feet). Artificial bodies of water with a recirculation system approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department are not included in this definition. LAND CLEARING: The act of removing or destroying trees or ground cover including grubbing of stumps and root mat. LAND-CLEARING WASTE: Stumps, brush, tree branches, and other vegetation associated with land clearing. LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: An approved preliminary or final plat for single family residential project, a building permit, site plan, or preliminary or final planned unit development plan. LAND USE DECISION: A land use decision for purposes of a land use appeal under RMC 4-8-110, Appeals, means a final determination by a City body or officer with the highest level of authority to make the determination, including those with authority to hear appeals on: 1. An application for a project permit or other governmental approval required by law before real property may be improved, developed, modified, SOld, transferred or used, but excluding applications for permits or approvals to use, vacate, or transfer streets, parks, and other similar types of public property; excluding applications for legislative approval such as area-wide rezones and annexations; and excluding applications for business licenses; 2. An interpretive or declaratory decision regarding the application to a specific property of zoning or other ordinances or rules regulating the improvement, development, modification, maintenance, or use of real property; 3. The enforcement by the City of codes regulating improvement, development, modification, maintenance or use of real property. However, when the City is required by law to enforce the code in a court of limited jurisdiction, a petition may not be brought under RMC 4-8-110. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .docH:\EDN8P\Comp PJan\AmendmeRts\GMA Update\Zoning Implement GMA\Chapter 1.1 updated from MRSC 4 11 060 L leg .doc Page 1 of Q LAND USE ELEMENT: A plan designating the location and extent of use for agriculture, timber production, housing, commerce, industry, recreation, open spaces, public utilities, public facilities, and other land uses as required by the Growth Management Act. LANDFILL: Creation or mainten8:nce of beach or creation of dry upland area by the deposit of sand, soil, gravel or other materials into shoreline areas. LANDS COVERED BY WATER: Lands underlying the water areas of the state below the ordinary high water mark, including salt waters, tidal waters, estuarine waters, natural watercourses, lakes, ponds, artificially impounded waters, marshes, and swamps. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: A professional landscape architect licen~ed to practice by the State of Washington. LANDSCAPE BUFFER: An on-site strip abutting a property line which provides a physical, visual, and/or noise buffer and transition between land use of varying compatibilities and/or the street. Landscape buffers consist primarily of natural landscaping and selected hard surface elements, when deemed appropriate by the reviewing official. I . i LANDSCAPED VISUAL BARRIER: Evergreen trees, and/or evergreen shrubs providing equivalent buffering, planted to provide a year-round dense screen within three (3) years from the time of planting. LANDSCAPING: The installation of lawns, trees, shrubs, flowers, ground cover and similar items to enhance a property's attractiveness, prevent erosion, improve security or for similar purposes. LICENSED ENGINEER: A professional engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Washington. LIGHT DEFINITIONS: The following definitions are utilized in the Exterior Onsite Lighting Regulations, RMC 4-4-075: A. Cutoff: The point at which all light rays emitted by a light source are completely eliminated (cut off) at a specific angle above the ground. B. Cutoff Angle: The angle formed by a line drawn from the direction of light rays at the light source and a line perpendicular to the ground from the light source, above which no light is emitted. C. Cutoff Type Luminaire: A unit of illumination with elements such as shields, reflectors, or refractor panels that direct and cut off the light at a cut off angle less than ninety degrees (90°). D. Light Trespass: The shining, of light produced by a light source beyond the boundaries of the property on which it is located.' E. Luminaire: The complete lighting unit, including the lamp, the fixture, and other parts. , H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .doc Page 2 of §. LOADING AREA: A specially designed off-street place intended to be used by vehicles for depositing and/or receiving passengers and goods. LOCAL SERVICE UTILITIES: Public or private utilities normally servicing a neighborhood, i.e., telephone exchanges; sewer, both storm and sanitary; distribution lines, electrical less than fifty five (55) kv, telephone, cable TV, etc. LONG-RANGE WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN: See RMC 4-6-100. LOT: A specifically described parcel of land with boundary lines defining the extent of the lot in a given direction. LOT: A fractional part of divided lands having fixed boundaries, being of sufficient area and dimension to meet minimum zoning requirements for width and area. The term shall include ''tracts'' or "parcels." The lot area for purposes of meeting minimum zoning requirements shall not include land included in private access easements. See LOT TYPES. LOT COVERAGE: The horizontal area measured within the outside of the exterior walls of all principal and accessory buildings on a lot including all covered decks and porches. I 1 I ·1 I i I I 1_-.. -.:J OlmpervioU5 Surfacing ~ Lot Coverage LOT, DEVELOPED: (This definition for RMC 4-4-130, Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, only.) A lot or parcel of land upon which a structure(s) is located, which cannot be more intensely developed pursuant to the City Zoning . Code, and which cannot be further subdivided pursuant to City subdivision regulations. LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT: A lot line adjustment is the adjusting of common property line(s) or boundaries between adjacent lots, tracts, or parcels for the purpose of accommodating a transfer of land, rectifying a disputed property line location, or freeing such a boundary from any difference or discrepancies. The resulting adjustment shall not create any additional lots, tracts or parcels and all reconfigured lots, tracts or parcels shall contain sufficient area and dimension to meet minimum requirements for zoning and building purposes. LOT LINES: The property lines bounding the lot. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .doc Page 3 of §. LOT MEASUREMENTS: A. Lot Depth: Depth of a lot shall be considered to be the average distance between the foremost points of the side lot lines in front (i.e., the points where the side lot lines intersect with the street right-of-way line) and the rear-most points of the side lot lines in the rear. In the case of pipestem lots, the pipestem portion of the lot shall be ignored for purposes of the calculation of average depth. r1 5 I f .. ,.,. .. ~o -r Y~.' [ I \ 11 0t- 0 -1"'00/00 1 i L!Lro °r~\ . :..s= 10 (= 0 ~, [~. o:t \ ~ : t '101 '6 0 I : : I \ i. .----.. -...--,. .. oJloo * "-\-.J front Lot Line . STREET - B. Lot Width: Width of a lot shall be considered to be the average distance between the side lines connecting front and rear lot lines, except for pipestem lots, where the pipestem portion of a lot shall be ignored for purposes of calculating the average width. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .doc Page 4 of Q . -r-"r-r .. ~., 1 l t--< .. / " I .I-~. \ .., J Iotwk:lthtyp. 1: fo= , \-__ Iotwk:lth J IN..!.- t )\ \ I L._ .. _. ii .. _ .. _:\-.-L font lot Line SiR EEl LOT, PARTIALLY DEVELOPED: (This definition for RMC 4-4-130, Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations, only.) A lot or parcel of land upon which a structure is located and which is of sufficient area so as to be capable of accommodating increased development pursuant to the Renton Zoning Code; or which may be subdivided in accordance with the City subdivision regulations. LOT TYPES: r--.o __ oo _____ o. __ .o, I Throu<jh Lot . \ t·-o-ro_0--y--.. _ol <s> I FlaG Lot I 0 ~ ~ I ~··-·I I InterIOr Lot I a Icorner LotllnterlOr Lot I t-··-----i , I : I Corner Lot i ~" 0 . -1.1,,_,0---1 Street Ir A. Lot, Corner: A lot abutting upon two (2) or more streets at their intersection, or upon two (2) parts of the same street, such streets or parts of the same street forming an interior angle of less than one hundred thirty five degrees (135°) within the lot lines. B. Lot, Flag: A lot with access to a public road only by a private accessway less than thirty feet (30') in width. See Lot, Pipestem. C. Lot, Interior: A lot that generally abuts or has frontage on only one street, although on through lots that run from one block face to another, such lots could abut two (2) streets. D. Lot, Pipestem: A lot not meeting minimum frontage requirements. E. Lot, Through: A lot that has both ends fronting on a street. LOT, UNDEVELOPED: A platted lot or parcel of land upon which no structure exists. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .doc Page 5 of Q LOW IMPACT LAND USE: Land uses which are not likely to have a significant adverse impact on critical areas because of the low intensity of the use, minimal levels of human activity, limited use of machinery or chemicals, site design or arrangement of buildings and structures, incorporation of mitigation measures, or other factors. LOWEST FLOOR: The lowest floor of the lowest enclosed area (including basement). An unfinished or flood-resistant enclosure, usable solely for parking of vehicles, building access or storage, in an area other than a basement area, is not considered a building's lowest floor; provided, that such enclosure is not built so as to render the structure in violation of the applicable non-elevation design requirements of RMC 4-3-0501. ' (Ord. 3758,12-5-1983; Ord. 3891, 2-25-1985; Ord. 4056,4-30-1987; Ord. 4071, 6-1-1987; Ord. 4351, 5-4-1992; Ord. 4522, 6-5-1995; Ord. 4740, 7-19-1999; Ord. 4351,5-4-1992; Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Ord. 4522, 6-5-1995; Ord. 4660, 3-17- 1997; Ord. 4715, 4-6-1998; Ord. 4716, 4-13-1998; Ord. 4751,11-16-1998; Ord. 4835,3-27-2000; Ord. 4851, 8-7-2000; Ord. 4854,8-14-2000; Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 L leg .doc Page 6 of § 4-11-190 DEFINITIONS S to be amended by the following revisions Chapter 11 DEFINITIONS 4-11-190 DEFINITIONS S: SALES/MARKETING TRAILERS, ONSITE: Trailers used for temporary on-site sales and marketing of developments and/or construction sites. SCHOOLS/STUDIOS, ARTS AND CRAFTS: Schools and studios for education in various arts and crafts including but not limited to photography, dance, music, and language skills. SECONDARY CONTAINMENT: See RMC 4-5-120G. SECURE COMMUNITY TRANSITION FACILITY (SCTF): A residential facility for persons civilly committed and conditionally released to a.less restrictive alternative under chapter 71.09 RCW. A secure community transition facility has supervision and security, and either provides or ensures the provision of sex offender treatment services. Secure community transition facilities include but are not limited to the facilities established pursuant to RCW 71.09.250 and any community-based facilities established under chapter 71.09 RCW and operated by or under contract with the Washington State Department of Social and Health Services. (Ord. 4982, 9-23-2002) SEGREGATION: Division of land into lots or tracts each of which is one-one hundred twenty eighth (1/128) of a section of land or larger, or five (5) acres or larger if the land is not capable of description as a fraction of a section of land. SENSITIVE AREAS: See CRITICAL AREAS. SEPA: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (chapter 43.21 C RCW). SERVICE AND SOCIAL ORGANIZATIONS: An incorporated or unincorporated nongovernmental or private association of persons organized for social, education, literary or charitable purposes. This·definition also includes community meeting halls, philanthropic institutions, private clubs, fraternal or nonprofit organizations, and social service organizations. This definition excludes religious . institutions and offices, and government facilities. SERVICEABLE: Presently usable. SERVICES, OFF-SITE: Establishments primarily engaged in providing individual or professional services at the customer's home or place of business. Examples of off-site services include, but are not limited to, temporary employment services, janitorial services, and professional house cleaner services. This definition excludes service and social organizations and on-site services. SERVICES, ON-SITE: Establishments primarily engaged in providing individual or professional services within the place of business, such as beauty and barber H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapler 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 1 of 12 shops, retail laundry and dry-cleaning including coin-operated, garment alterations and repair, photo studios, shoe repair, pet grooming, photography and photo reproduction, real estate offices, personal accountants, entertainment media rental or other indoor rental services, and repair of personal or household items, except for vehicle repair. This definition excludes adult retail uses, service and social organizations, and off-~ite services. SETBACK: The minimum required distance between the building footprint and the property line or private access easement. SETBACK: (For purposes of the Shoreline Master Program.) A required open space specified in the Shoreline ~aster Program, measured horizontally upland from and perpendicular to the ordinary high water mark. SETBACK LINE, LEGAL: The line established by ordinance beyond which no building may be built. SEWAGE: See RMC 4-6-100. , SEWAGE DISPOSAL AND TREATMENT PLANTS: A facility designed for the collection, removal, treatment, and disposal of waterborne sewage. This definition excludes disposal facilities. SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT: See RMC 4-6-100. SEWAGE WORKS: See RMC 4~6-100. SEWER: See RMC 4-6-100. SEWER, BUILDING: See RMC ,4-6-100. SEWER, PUBLIC: See RMC 4-6-100. SEWER, SANITARY: See RMC 4-6-100. SHOPPING CENTER: A group of buildings, structures and/or uncovered commercial areas, or a single building containing four (4) or more individual commercial establishments, planned, developed and managed as a unit related in location and type of shops to the trade areas that the unit serves. SHORELAND or SHORELAND AREAS: Those lands extending landward for two hundred feet (200') in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from ordinary high water mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred feet (200') from such floodways; and all marshes, bogs, swamps, and river deltas, associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the State Shorelines Management Act. For purposes of determining jurisdictional area, the boundary will be either two hundred feet (200') from the ordinary high water mark, or two hundred feet (200') from the floodway, whichever is greater. SHORELINES: All of the water areas of the State regulated by the City of Renton, including reservoirs, and their associated shorelands, together with the lands underlying them, except: H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 2 of 15 1. Shorelines of statewide significance. 2. Shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a pOint where the mean annual flow is twenty (20) cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments. 3. Shorelines on lakes less than twenty (20) acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes. SHORELINES OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE: Those shorelines described in RCW 90.58.030(2)(e). SHORELINES OF THE STATE: The total of all "shorelines" and "shorelines of statewide significance" regulated by the City of Renton. SHORT PLAT: The map or representation of a short subdivision. See PLAT, SHORT. . SHORT SUBDIVISION: See PLAT, SHORT. SIDE SEWER: See RMC 4-6-100. SIDE SEWER STUB: See RMC4-6-100. SIDE YARD: See YARD REQUIREMENT. SIDEW ALK: A concrete walkway separated from the roadway by a curb, planting strip or roadway shoulder. SIGHT TRIANGLE: See CLEAR VISION AREA. SIGN: Any medium, including merchandise, its structure and component parts, that is used or intended to be used to attract attention to the subject matter for advertising purposes. Signs do not include sculptures, wall paintings, murals, collages, and other design features determined to be public art by the City. This li!!ur~ iIILISI'alc~ Ihe dit1cr~nI5igIlIYJl<.'" ~l1d i~ 1101 indi,alivc ofpcrm'ssih1c type. or nUDlbcH,ISigru;. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 3 of .l2. SIGN, A-FRAME: See SIGN, PORTABLE. SIGN, ANIMATED: A sign with action or motion, flashing or color changes requiring electrical energy, electrQnic or manufactured source of supply, but not including revolving signs or wind actuated elements such as flags or banners. SIGN AREA: A measurement of the total area of a sign visible from anyone viewpoint or direction, excluding the sign support structure, architectural embellishments, or, framework that contains no written copy, or does not form part of the sign proper or of the display. Freestanding letters or characters, where no background is specially provided, shall be measured by determining the smallest rectangle or polygon that encloses the extreme limits of the shapes to be used. SIGN, COMBINATION: Any sign 'incorporating any combination of the features of pole, projecting and roof signs. SIGN, ELECTRIC: Any sign containing or utilizing electrical wiring, but not including signs illuminated by an exterior light source. SIGN, ELECTRONIC MESSAGE BOARD: Signs whose alphabetic, pictographic, or symbolic informational content can be changed or altered on a fixed display screen composed of electrically illuminated segments. SIGN, FREESTANDING: A sign wholly supported by a sign structure in the ground. SIGN, GROUND: A type of freestanding sign, other than a freestanding pole sign, in which the sign is in contact with or close to the ground, has a solid base anchor, ,and is independent of any other structure. SIGN HEIGHT: Measured as the distance from grade, unless otherwise designated, to the top of the sign or sign structure. SIGN, ON-PREMISES: A sign which displays only advertising copy strictly incidental to the lawful use of the premises on which it is located, including signs or sign devices indicating the business transacted at, services rendered, goods sold or produced on the immediate premises, name of the business, person, firm or corporation occupying the premises. SIGN, POLITICAL: Signs advertising a candidate or candidates for public, elective office or a political party, or signs urging a particular vote or action on a public issue decided by ballot whether partisan or nonpartisan. SIGN, PORTABLE: A sign not permanently affixed which is deSigned for or capable of movement, except for those signs explicitly designed for people to carryon their persons or which are permanently affixed to motor vehicles. A. Sign, A-Frame: A nonilluminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A." These signs contact the ground but not are not anchored to the ground and are independent of any other structure. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg. doc Page 4 of 12 SIGN, PROJECTING: A sign other than a wall sign which projects from and is supported by a wall or a building or structure, and does not extend above any adjacent parapet or roof of the supporting building. SIGN, REAL ESTATE: A sign advertising and/or directing individuals to the sale, rent or lease of property. A. Commercial Real Estate Banner Sign: A sign of any shape made of lightweight fabric or similar material that is mounted to a building by any means, and indicating that the property is for sale, rent, or lease. National flags, state or municipal flags, holiday flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. B. Decorative Real Estate Flag: A portion of lightweight fabric or similar material, supported by a vertical or horizontal staff, intended to flutter in the wind, and is used to attract attention to any type of residential development for sale, rent, or lease. National flags, state or municipal flags, holiday flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. C. Freestanding Real Estate Signs: Any type of nonilluminated freestanding sign, indicating that the property on which it is located, is for sale, rent, or lease. This sign type includes yardarm or ground signs. D. Open House Sign: A nonilluminated type of portable sign comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A," no larger than thirty two inches wide by thirty six inches high (32" by 36") per each sign face. The sign text for an open house sign contains the phrase: "open" or "for sale" or "for rent" or "for lease." E. Real Estate Directional Sign: Any nonilluminated type of freestanding sign that provides direction to property(ies) for sale, rent, or lease. Within the City Center Sign Regulation Boundaries (as shown in RMC 4-4-1 OOH3), real estate directional signs may also include portable signs comprised of hinged panels configured in the shape of the alphabetic letter "A." SIGN, ROOF: A sign erected upon or above a roof or parapet of a building or structure. SIGN STRUCTURE: Any structure which supports or is capable of supporting any sign as defined in this Title. A sign structure may be a single pole and may not be an integral part of the building. SIGN, TEMPORARY: Any sign, banner, or advertising display constructed of cloth, canvas, light fabric, cardboard, wallboard or other light materials, with or without frames, or advertising device intended to be displayed only for a limited period of time inCluding the following types of signs: A. Advertising Device: Balloons, flags, inflatable statuary and figures, light strings, pennants/streamers, portable readerboards, searchlights, wind-animated devices, and similar devices of a carnival nature. B. Balloon: Aspherical, flexible, nonporous bag inflated with air or gas lighter than air, such as helium, and intended to float in the air. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter Ll updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 5 of 12 C. Banner: Any sign of lightweight fabric or similar material that is mounted to a pole and/or building by any means. National flags, state or municipal flags, holiday flags, or the official flag of any institution or business shall not be considered banners. A banner is not defined by shape and may be square, rectangular, round, triangular/pennant shaped, etc. 1. Banner, Pole Hung: A banner attached at its top and bottom to a pole or light standard by extensions from the pole. 2. Banner, Pole/Wall Strung: A banner attached at its top and bottom corners strung between buildings, poles, and/or light standards. 3. Banner, Wall Hung: A banner attached to a building and where the banner lies flat against the building surface at all times. D. Devices of a Carnival Nature: All temporary signs, advertising devices, lights, and other means of attracting attention, which are commonly associated with carnival settings, and which are not otherwise specifically identified in the Renton Municipal Code. Fabric or' plastic bunting shall be considered one type of carnival device. E. Flag: A piece of cloth or plastic, supported by a vertical or horizontal staff, which is intended to flutter in the wind. F. Inflatable Statuary: An advertising device that is inflated and the likeness of an animate or inanimate object or'cartoon figure is used to attract attention, advertise, promote, market, or display goods and/or services. G. Manual Message Board: Any sign that is designed so that characters, letters, or illustrations can be changed or rearranged by hand without altering the face or the surface of the sign. H. Pennant/Streamer: An individual object and/or series of small objects made of lightweight plastic, fabric, or other material, which mayor may not contain text, which is suspended from and/or twined around a rope, wire, or string. I. Readerboards, Portable: A sign which is self-supporting but not permanently attached to the ground or building and can be moved from one location to another and is typically internally illuminated. Portable readerboards are also known as "trailer signs." J. Sign, Rigid Portable: A sign which is not permanently affixed and designed for or capable of movement. Those signs explicitly designed for people to carry on their persons or which are permanently affixed to motor vehicles are considered to be rigid portable signs. A rigid portable sign is not considered to be a portable readerboard or "trailer sign." K. Sign, Window: Any sign, temporary or permanent, designed to communicate information about an activity, business, commodity, event, sale, or service, that is placed inside a window; Interior display of merchandise for sale, including accessory mannequins and other props, shall not be considered window signs. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapler Ll updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S Jeg.doc Page 6 of 15 L. Wind-Animated Object: Any device, e.g., windsocks, pinwheels, whirligigs, etc., whose primary movements are caused by the wind or atmospheric conditions, attached by a tether. A balloon or inflatable statuary, with or without moveable parts, is not considered a wind-animated object. SIGN, TRADITIONAL MARQUEE: A sign typically associated with movie theaters, performing arts theaters, and theatrical playhouses. The sign is attached flat against and parallel to the surface of a marquee structure. In addition, a changeable copy area is included where characters, letters, or illustrations can be changed or rearranged without altering the face or the surface of the sign. SIGN, UNDER MARQUEE: A lighted or unlighted display attached to the underside of a marquee protruding over public or private sidewalks. Under marquee signs may also be called "under awning" or "under canopy" signs. SIGN, WALL: Any sign painted, attached or erected against the wall of a building or structure, with the exposed face of the sign in a plane parallel to the plane of said wall. In order to be considered a wall sign, a sign may not extend above any adjacent parapet or the roof of the supporting building. SIGNIFICANT #2 RATING: A rating aSSigned to wetlands in King County that are greater than one acre in size; equal to or less than one acre in size and having a forested vegetation class; or the presence of heron rookeries or raptor nesting trees. SINGLE-WALLED: See RMC 4-5-120G. SITE PLAN: A detailed plan drawing, prepared to scale, showing accurate boundaries of a site and the location of all buildings, structures, uses, and principal site development features proposed for a specific parcel of land. SLOPE: An inclined ground surface the inclination of which is expressed as a ratio of horizontal distance to vertical distance, which may be regulated or unregulated. SLOPE, STEEP: A hillside, or portion thereof, which falls into one of two (2) classes of slope, sensitive or protected. A. Slope, Protected: A hillside, or portion thereof, with an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of forty percent (40%) or greater grade and having a minimum vertical rise of fifteen feet (15'). B. Slope, Sensitive: A hillside, or portion thereof, characterized by: (1) an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of twenty five percent (25%) to less than forty percent (40%); or (2) an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of forty percent (40%) or greater with a vertical rise of less than fifteen feet (15'), abutting an average slope, as identified in the City of Renton Steep Slope Atlas or in a method approved by the City, of twenty five percent (25%) to forty percent (40%). This definition excludes engineered retaining walls. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 7 of 15 SMP: City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program. SOIL ENGINEER: A licensed civil engineer experienced and knowledgeable in the practice of soil engineering. SOIL ENGINEERING: The application of the principles of soil mechanics in the investigation, evaluation and design of civil works involving the use of earth or other materials and the inspection and testing of the construction thereof. SOIL ENGINEERING REPORT: A report including data regarding the nature, distribution, and strength of existing soils, conclusions and recommendations for grading procedures and design criteria for corrective measures when necessary, and options and recommendations covering adequacy of sites to be developed by the proposed grading. SOLID WASTE: Shall be defined as per Minimal Functional Standards for Solid Waste Handling, WAC 173-304-100(73). SPECIFIED ANATOMICAL AREAS: 1. Less than completely and opaquely covered human genitals, anus, pubic region, buttock, or female breast below a point immediately above the top of the areola; or , 2. Human male genitals in a qiscernibly turgid state, even if completely and opaquely covered. SPECIFIED SEXUAL ACTIVITIES: 1. Human genitals in a state of sexual stimulation or arousal; 2. Acts of human masturbation, sexual intercourse, sodomy, oral copulation, or bestiality; 3. Fondling or other erotic touching of human genitals, pubic region, buttocks, or female breasts, whether clothed or unclothed, of oneself or of one person by another; or 4. Excretory functions as part of or in connection with any of the activities set forth in this definition. SPORTS ARENAS, AUDITORIUMS, AND EXHIBITION HALLS, INDOOR: A large enclosed facility used for professional, semi-professional spectator sports, arena concerts, expositions, and other large-scale public gatherings. This definition includes stadiums, concert halls, auditoriums, exhibition halls, and accessory eating and drinking establishments. This definition excludes sports arenas or stadiums associated with schools, cultural facilities, movie theaters, and entertainment clubs. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA \Chapter L 1 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 8 of 1). SPORTS ARENAS, OUTDOOR: A large outdoor facility used for professional, semi-professional spectator sports, arena concerts, and other large-scale public gatherings. This definition includes but is not limited to stadiums, concert arenas, and accessory eating and drinking establishments. This definition excludes sports arenas or stadiums associated with schools, cultural facilities, movie theaters, and entertainment clubs. STABLES, COMMERCIAL: A land use on which equines are kept for sale or hire to the public. Breeding, boarding, or training of equines may also be conducted. STACKING SPACE: The space specifically designated as a waiting area for vehicles whose occupants will be patronizing a drive-through business. Such space is considered to be located directly alongside a drive-in window, facility or entrance used by patrons and in lanes leading up to the business establishment. START OF CONSTRUCTION: Includes substantial improvement and means the date the building permit was issued; provided, the actual start of construction, repair, reconstruction, placement or other improvement was within one hundred eighty (180) days of the permit date. The actual start means either the first placement of permanent construction of a structure on a site, such as the pouring of slab or footings, the installation of piles, the construction of columns, or any work beyond the stage of excavation; or the placement of a manufactured home on a foundation. Permanent construction does not include land preparation, such as clearing, grading and filling; nor does it include the installation of streets and/or walkways; nor does it include excavation for a basement, footings, piers, or foundation or the erection of temporary forms; nor does it include the installation on the property as accessory buildings, such as garages or sheds not occupied as dwelling units or not part of the main structure. For a substantial improvement, the actual start of construction means the first alteration of any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of a building, whether or not that alteration affects the external dimensions of the building. STORAGE, BULK: 1. The holding or stockpiling on land of material and/or products where such storage constitutes forty percent (40%) of the developed site area and the storage area is at least one acre, and where at least three (3) of the following criteria are met by the storage activity: a. In a bulk form or in bulk containers; b. Under protective cover to the essential exclusion of other uses of the same space due to special fixtures or exposed to the elements; c. In sufficient numbers, quantities or spatial allocation of the site to determine and rank such uses as the principal use of the site; H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter L 1 updated from MRSC 4-1 I -060 S leg.doc Page 9 of 15 d. The major function is the collection and/or distribution of the material and/or products rather than processing; and e. The presence of fixed bulk containers or visible stockpiles for a substantial period of a year. 2. Bulk storage facilities incJu~e, but are not limited to: a. Automobile holding and transfer depots; b. Brick or tile storage and manufacturing; c. Concrete block and products storage and manufacturing; d. Contractor equipment yards; e. Equipment or machinery of the stationary type not in use, not mounted on necessary foundations' or connected as required when during use, not designated and used as portable, and not stored in a warehouse. This includes operable motor vehicles or wheeled equipment used only periodically where storage durations exceed those provided for parking lots as defined in RMC 4-4-080, Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations; f. Foundries; I g. Fuel yards, wholesale; : h. Grain or feed sites, elevators, or the open storage of grain and feed; i. Log, random cut and chipped wood by-products storage; j. Lumber mills and wholesalers; k. Sand and gravel yards including sizing, transfer and loading equipment when present; I. Scrap or junk yards and wrecking yards; H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 10 of 15 I m. Solid waste holding and disposal areas; n. Tank farms including distribution and loading systems. 3. Bulk storage facilities exclude: a. Land banks, greenbelts, watersheds or public water reservoirs; b. Parking lots or structures for private licensed automobiles; c. Ship yards; d. Warehouses alone or in conjunction with manufacturing on the site and when not including any of the uses listed above in subsection (2)(a) through (2)(n) of this definition; e. Facilities for storage of petroleum or any of its by-products, for use incidental to the primary use of the property (e.g., heating, boiler or vehicular fuel or lubricants); f. Retail service stations; g. Retail sales lots for new or used automobiles. STORAGE, HAZARDOUS MATERIAL, ON-SITE OR OFF-SITE, INCLUDING TREATMENT: A facility engaged in storage of materials, produced on-site or brought from another site, that are inflammable, explosive, or that present hazards to the public health, safety, and welfare including all substances and materials as defined under hazardous materials, hazardous substances, and hazardous waste. STORAGE, INDOOR: A use engaged in the storage of goods and/or materials characterized by infrequent pick-up and delivery, and located within a building. The definition excludes hazardous material storage, self-service storage, warehousing and distribution, and vehicle storage. STORAGE, OUTDOOR: A use engaged in outdoor storage, wholesale, sales, rental, and distribution of products, supplies, and equipment. This definition excludes hazardous material storage, warehousing and distribution, and vehicle storage. STORAGE, SELF-SERVICE: A building or group of buildings consisting of individual, self-contained units leased to individuals, organizations, or businesses for self-service storage of personal property. This definition excludes indoor storage, warehousing, outdoor storage, and hazardous material storage. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 11 of 15 STORAGE, VEHICLE: An indoor or outdoor area for parking or holding of motor vehicles and boats or wheeled equipment for more than seventy two (72) hours. This definition excludes vehicle sales, vehicle rental, body shops, tow truck operation/auto impoundment yard, auto wrecking yard, outdoor storage, and indoor storage. STORM SEWER and STORM DRAIN: A sewer which carries storm surface water, subsurface water and drainage. See RMC 4-6-100. STORY: That portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the upper surface of the ,floor above, except that the topmost story shall be that portion of a building included between the upper surface of the topmost floor and the 'ceiling or roof above. If the finished floor level directly above a usable or unused under-floor space is more than six feet (6') above grade for more than fifty percent (50%) of the total perimeter or is more than twelve feet (12') above grade at any point, such usable or unused under-floor space shall be considered as a story. ' BASEMENT II II 'I g=-:'-:';':='~=--':'-,,:;'::"=''=1!s ' VERTIC!.J.. DISTANCE FROM ROOR LEVa TO ADJACENT GRADE LESS THAN 6' FOR 50'10 OF PERIMETER OF Tl-E STRUCTURE STORY , J : ft J:S"----'--~=--..:;""'~;;;;1!, VERTIC!.J.. DISTANCE FROM FLOOR LE.Ya TO ADJACENT GRADE GREATER lHAN 6' FOR 50% OF PERIMETER OF Tl-E STRUCTURE STORY, FIRST: The lowest story in a building that qualifies as a story, as defined herein, except that a floor level in a building having only one floor level shall be classified as a first story, provided such floor level is not more than four feet (4') below grade for more than fifty percent (50%) of the total perimeter, or not more than eight feet (8') belo~ grade at any point. STREAM ALTERATION: The re,ocation or change in the flow of surface water runoff flowing in a natural or modified channel. STREAM, CREEK, RIVER, OR WATERCOURSE: Any portion of a channel, bed, bank, or bottom waterward of the ordinary high water mark in which fish may spawn, reside, or through w.hich they may pass, and tributary waters with defined beds or bank which influence the quality of fish habitat downstream. This includes watercourses which flow on an intermittent basis or which fluctuate in level during the year, and applies to the entire bed of such watercourse whether H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter Ll updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S Jeg.docPage 12 of.u or not the water is at peak level. This definition does not include irrigation of ditches, canals, stormwater runoff devices, or other entirely artificial watercourses, except where they exist in a natural watercourse which has been altered by humans or except where there are salmonids. Refer also to RMC 4-3- 050B6. STREET, ARTERIAL: Streets intended for higher traffic volumes and speeds as designated by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. STREET, COLLECTOR: A street providing access with higher traffic volumes than a typical residential, commercial, or industrial access street. Collector streets are designated by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. STREET, COMMERCIAL ACCESS: A non-arterial street providing access to commercial land uses. STREET FRONT AGE: (For purposes of sign regulations.) Business directly abutting a public right-of-way affording direct access to the business, or having a parking lot used by one business which·fronts directly on and gaining vehicular access from the public right-of-way. STREET, INDUSTRIAL ACCESS: A non-arterial street providing access to industrial land uses. STREET, RESIDENTIAL ACCESS: A non-arterial street providing access to residential land uses, and not designated as a collector street by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department. STRUCTURE: That which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind, or any piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner. STRUCTURE: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A combination of materials constructed or erected on the ground or water or attached to something having a location on the ground or water. SUBDIVISION: The division or redivision of land into lots, tracts, parcels, sites or divisions for the purpose of sale, lease, or transfer of ownership. See also PLAT and PLAT, SHORT. SUBDIVISION: (This definition for RMC 4-3-090, Shoreline Master Program Regulations, use only.) A parcel of land divided into two (2) or more parcels. SUBDIVISION, PHASED: A subdivision which is developed in increments over a period of time. Preliminary plat approval must be granted for the entire subdivision and must delineate the separate divisions which are to be developed in increments. The preliminary plat approval shall be conditioned upon completion of the proposed phases in a particular sequence and may specify a completion date for each phase. Final plat approval shall be granted for each separate phase of the preliminary plat and any changes at the preliminary plat stage Would require Council approval. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zonjng -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 13 of 15 I SUBJECT PROPERTY: The tract of land which is the subject of the permit and/or approval action. SUBST ANTIAL DAMAGE: Damage of any origin sustained by a structure whereby the cost of restoring the structure to its before damaged condition would equal or exceed fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure before the damage occurred. SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500.00) or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the water or shoreline of the State. Exemptions in RCW 90.58.030(3)(e) and in RMC 4-9- 190C are not considered substantial developments. SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: The shoreline management substantial development permit provided for in Section 14 of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (RCW 90.58.140). SUBST ANTIAL EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS: Physical improvements, such as residential and/or commercial structures and their accessory structures, that have a reasonable remaining economic life as indicated by their assessed valuation. SUBST ANTIAL IMPROVEMENT: Any repair, reconstruction, or improvement of a structure, the cost of which equals or exceeds fifty percent (50%) of the market value of the structure either: 1 . Before the improvement dr repair is st~rted; or 2. If the structure has been damaged and is being restored, before the damage occurred. For the purposes of this definition "substantial improvement" is considered to occur when the first alteration of, any wall, ceiling, floor, or other structural part of the building commences, whether or nor that alteration affects the external dimensions of the structure. The term does not, however, include either: 1. Any project for improvement of a structure to complywith existing State or local health, sanitary, or safety code specifications which are solely necessary to assure safe living conditions; or 2. Any alteration of a structure listed on the National Register of Historic Places or a State Inventoryof Historic Places. SUBTENANT: A person in possession of rental unit through the tenant with the knowledge and consent, express or implied, of the owner. H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg. doc Page 14 of 12 SURVEY STANDARDS: City of Renton Survey Standards as adopted by the Planning/Building/ Public Works Department. (Ord. 2820, 1-14-1974; Ord. 3366, 10-15-1979; Ord. 3719, 4-11-1980; Ord. 3758, 12-5-1983; Ord. 4071, 6-1-1987; Ord. 4172, 9-12-1988; Ord. 4346, 3-9-1992; Ord. 4367, 9-14-1992; Ord. 4517, 5-8-1995; Ord. 4521, 6-5-1995; Ord. 4522, 6- 5-1995; Ord. 4577, 1-22-1996; Ord. 4636, 9-23-1996; Ord. 4691, 1-6-1997; Ord. 4716,4-13-1998; Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998; Ord. 4724,5-11-1998; Ord. 4828,1-24- 2000; Ord. 4832, 3-6-2000; Ord. 4835, 3-27-2000; Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 4851,8-7-2000; Ord. 4917, 9-17-2001; Amd. Ord. 4963,5-13-2002; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\Zoning -Implement GMA\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 S leg.doc Page 15 of 15 \ 4-11-250 DEFIN ITIONS Y to be amended by the following revisions 4-11-250 DEFINITIONS Y: YARD: An open space between a building and a lot line. YARD REQUIREMENT: An open space on a lot unoccupied by structures, unless specifically authorized otherwise. The required yard depth is measured perpendicularly from a lot line or private easement access to the outer wall of the structure. In the case where a structure does not have an outer wall, such as a carport, the measurement shall be to the posts of such structure, unless otherwise determined by the Development Services Division. The Development Services Division shall determine the various requirements for uniquely shaped lots and pipestem lots. A. Front Yard: The yard requirement which separates the structure(s) from public right-of-way or private access easement. For through lots, corner lots, and lots without street frontage, the front yard will be determined by the Development Services Division Director. B. Side Yard along a Street: The yard requirement which is neither a front yard nor a rear yard, yet it abuts a street right-of-way or private acess easement. C. Rear Yard: The yard requirement opposite the front yard. Where a lot abuts an alley, the rear yard shall always be the yard abutting the alley. For irregularly shaped lots, the rear yard shall be measured from an imaginary line at least fifteen feet {15'} in length located entirely within the lot and farthest removed and parallel to the front lot line or its tangent. D. Side Yard: The yard requirement which is not a front yard, a side yard along a street, or a rear yard. (Amd. Ord. 4963, 5-13-2002; Ord. 4999,1-13-2003) H:\EDNSP\Comp Plan\Amendments\GMA Update\State Review\zONING\Chapter 11 updated from MRSC 4-11-060 Y leg.doc Page 1 of 1 CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGIBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: June 13, 2005 TO: Nancy Weil, Planning FROM: Carrie Olson, Plan Review (§J SUBJECT: WATERBURY SHORT PLAT LUA-04-102-SHPL Attached is the LUA folder for the short plat. We are in the final review stage of recording this short plat. If you find any short plat requirements that have not been properly addressed, please let me know. Please return comments and folder to me by Monday, June 20, 2005, so I can proceed to final recording. Thanks. • Mitigation Fees have been paid. • Demo Permit required but not obtain yet. Approval: \\\~~\.'!I)J NancyWeil Cc: Yellow File 1:\PlanReview\COLSON\Shortplats 2005\ Waterbury SHPL 08m PlanningReview.doc ,Date: dJ-::n-or-